Browsing by Subject "Publications"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Determining the Drivers of Academic Success in Surgery: An Analysis of 3,850 Faculty
    (Public Library of Science, 2015) Valsangkar, Nakul P.; Zimmers, Teresa A.; Kim, Bradford J.; Blanton, Casi; Joshi, Mugdha M.; Bell, Teresa M.; Nakeeb, Attila; Dunnington, Gary L.; Koniaris, Leonidas G.; Department of Surgery, IU School of Medicine
    OBJECTIVE: Determine drivers of academic productivity within U.S. departments of surgery. METHODS: Eighty academic metrics for 3,850 faculty at the top 50 NIH-funded university- and 5 outstanding hospital-based surgical departments were collected using websites, Scopus, and NIH RePORTER. RESULTS: Mean faculty size was 76. Overall, there were 35.3% assistant, 27.8% associate, and 36.9% full professors. Women comprised 21.8%; 4.9% were MD-PhDs and 6.1% PhDs. By faculty-rank, median publications/citations were: assistant, 14/175, associate, 39/649 and full-professor, 97/2250. General surgery divisions contributed the most publications and citations. Highest performing sub-specialties per faculty member were: research (58/1683), transplantation (51/1067), oncology (41/777), and cardiothoracic surgery (48/860). Overall, 23.5% of faculty were principal investigators for a current or former NIH grant, 9.5% for a current or former R01/U01/P01. The 10 most cited faculty (MCF) within each department contributed to 42% of all publications and 55% of all citations. MCF were most commonly general (25%), oncology (19%), or transplant surgeons (15%). Fifty-one-percent of MCF had current/former NIH funding, compared with 20% of the rest (p<0.05); funding rates for R01/U01/P01 grants was 25.1% vs. 6.8% (p<0.05). Rate of current-NIH MCF funding correlated with higher total departmental NIH rank (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Departmental academic productivity as defined by citations and NIH funding is highly driven by sections or divisions of research, general and transplantation surgery. MCF, regardless of subspecialty, contribute disproportionally to major grants and publications. Approaches that attract, develop, and retain funded MCF may be associated with dramatic increases in total departmental citations and NIH-funding.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Gender and authorship of publications from Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators (PALISI)
    (Frontiers Media, 2023-12-19) Jeyapalan, Asumthia S.; Brown, Stephanie R.; Gaspers, Mary G.; Haliani, Brittany; Kudchadkar, Sapna R.; Rowan, Courtney M.; Gertz, Shira J.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Introduction: Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators (PALISI) is a network fostering clinical research to optimize care for critically ill children. We aim to examine the efforts of the PALISI Network to increase gender parity in research, as evidenced by authorship. Methods: The first and senior authors of all published PALISI articles from 2002 to 2021 were analyzed for gender of presentation. Funding sources, impact factors, professional roles, and location were extracted. Results: We identified 303 articles, 61 published from 2002 to 2011, and 242 from 2012 to 2021. There were 302 first authors, representing 188 unique individuals, and 283 senior authors, representing 119 unique individuals. Over half (55.6%, n = 168) of the first authors were women. More women were first authors from 2012 to 2021 (n = 145, 60.2%) as compared to the years 2002-2011 [37.7%, n = 23, OR = 2.50 (95% CI: 1.40, 4.45, p = 0.002)]. Senior authors were 36.0% (n = 102) women, with no change over time. Women senior authors had a higher proportion of women first authors (67.7% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.017). No gender differences were noted based on article type or impact factor. The majority of authors came from institutions in the United States. Women had comparatively more NIH and CDC funding but received less funding from foundations and AHRQ. Discussion: In PALISI publications, first authorship by women has increased over time, such that it now exceeds both the proportion of women pediatric intensivists and women first authors in critical care publications. Senior authorship by women has been stagnant. A multifactorial approach by individuals, institutions, networks, and journals is needed to bring senior women authors to parity.