Examination of Publications from Academic Anesthesiology Faculty in the United States
Examination of Publications from Academic Anesthesiology Faculty in the United States
复制标题
DOI：
10.1213/ane.0b013e3182a91aa9
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-01
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
Wu, Christopher L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hurley, Robert W.;Zhao, Kevin;Wu, Christopher L.
背景技术：美国学术麻醉学的领导者呼吁对麻醉学部门的学术状况进行审查。美国国立卫生研究院的资金和美国麻醉师子集的出版质量进行了检查;然而，与学术麻醉师（定义为与医学院相关的教师）相关的出版输出和人口统计学特征是未知的。从美国医学院校协会的数据库中包含的人口统计学信息的所有学术麻醉师在美国被用来检查的出版物输出和人口统计学特征的麻醉学院在2年期间，从2006年至2008年。方法：检索了PubMed数据库中每位教员的所有出版物，并将其纳入包含其人口统计数据的数据库中包括院校、性别、学位、职级、聘任性质（兼职与全职），任用状况（联合与主要），部门分工，亚专业认证状态，以及额外的研究生医学教育培训。六千一百四十-在2006年至2008年期间，在美国108个麻醉学学术项目中任职的三名教师发表了8521篇手稿。37%的教师发表了一篇手稿，总体发表率中位数为0。级别较高的教师中，至少拥有1篇出版物的教师比例较大（教授与讲师的比值比[OR]= 6.4;置信区间[CI]，4.57 - 8.49; P <0.0001），男性（OR 1.3; CI 0.14-1.47; P <0.0001），具有礼节性预约身份（OR 2.1; CI 1.25-3.52; P = 0.0048）和缺乏研究生培训和亚专业认证（MD与接受培训+认证的MD的OR为1.3; CI，1.11 - 1.60; P = 0.0020）。具有医学博士学位的教师发表论文的可能性低于具有医学博士学位或博士学位的教师（OR分别为0.45; CI为0.32-0.65; P <0.0001; OR为0.27; CI为0.20-0.37; P <0.0001）。在至少发表一篇论文的教师组中，正教授教师的出版物是教师的3.8倍（CI，2.99 - 4.88; P <0.0001），而那些缺乏研究生培训的教师的出版物是那些受过培训和认证的教师的1.4倍（CI，1.16 - 1.78; P = 0.0009）。博士学位（P = 0.006），男性（P = 0.013），礼貌麻醉任命（P = 0.037）也与较高的publicationrates. CONCLUSIONS：与医学院相关的麻醉师的整体出版率在这段时间是低的。这些数据建立了美国学术麻醉学家学术活动的预先呼吁行动基线，以供将来比较。增加使用结构化的居民和研究员的教育计划，以及招募更多的MD/PhD和博士科学家的领域可能有助于提高学术麻醉部门的出版生产力。
BACKGROUND: Leaders in academic anesthesiology in the United States have called for an examination of the state of scholarship within anesthesiology departments. National Institutes of Health funding and publication quality of subsets of U.S anesthesiologists have been examined; however, the publication output of and the demographic characteristics that are associated with academic anesthesiologists, defined as faculty associated with a medical college, are unknown. A database from the American Association of Medical Colleges containing demographic information of all academic anesthesiologists in the United States was used to examine the publication output and demographic characteristics of anesthesiology faculty during a 2-year period from 2006 to 2008.METHOD: All the publications found in the PubMed database for each faculty member were retrieved and included in a database containing their demographics including institution, gender, academic degree, academic rank, nature of appointment (part versus full-time), status of appointment (joint versus primary), departmental division, subspecialty certification status, and additional graduate medical education training.RESULTS: Six thousand one hundred forty-three faculty who held positions at the 108 U.S. academic anesthesiology programs published 8521 manuscripts between 2006 and 2008. Thirty-seven percent of faculty published a manuscript, and the overall median publication rate was 0. The proportion of faculty with at least 1 publication was larger among faculty with higher rank (Odds Ratio [OR] for professors versus instructors = 6.4; confidence interval [CI], 4.57-8.49; P < 0.0001), male gender (OR 1.3; CI, 0.14-1.47; P < 0.0001), possessing a courtesy appointment status (OR 2.1; CI, 1.25-3.52; P = 0.0048) and lacking postgraduate training and subspecialty certification (OR for MD versus MD w/training + certification 1.3; CI, 1.11-1.60; P = 0.0020). Those faculty with an MD had lower probablility of publishing when compared with MD/PhD or PhD faculty (OR 0.45; CI, 0.32-0.65; P < 0.0001; OR 0.27; CI, 0.20-0.37; P < 0.0001, respectively). Within the group of faculty who published at least 1 paper, full professor faculty had 3.8 times more publications than instructors (CI, 2.99-4.88; P < 0.0001), and those who lacked postgraduate training had 1.4 times more publications than those who were trained and certified (CI, 1.16-1.78; P = 0.0009). PhD degree (P = 0.006), male gender (P = 0.013), and courtesy anesthesia appointment (P = 0.037) also were associated with higher publication rates.CONCLUSIONS: The overall publication rate of anesthesiologists associated with medical schools was low in this time period. These data establish the pre-call to action baseline of scholarly activity by U.S. academic anesthesiologists for future comparisons. Increased use of structured resident and fellow research education programs as well as recruiting more MD/PhD and PhD scientists to the field may help to improve the publication productivity of academic anesthesiology departments.