Assessment of Burnout, Professional Fulfillment, and Strategies for Improvement in Veterinary Faculty at a Large Academic Department

Retention and recruitment of clinical faculty is crucial for the success of quality veterinary education. Clinical faculty in busy teaching hospital environments have the potential to experience significant burnout, though few studies have focused on identifying stressors in this group. The objective of this study was to measure burnout and professional fulfillment in clinical faculty using a recently validated instrument, the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index (PFI). The survey was distributed to faculty in July 2020, a time that coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was completed by 80% (52/65) of survey recipients. Scores for Overall Burnout were significantly higher ( p = .027) and Professional Fulfillment scores significantly lower ( p < .001) for veterinary faculty when compared to a reference group of academic physicians. 61.7% (29/47) of the faculty met the criteria for burnout, and 20.4% (10/49) met the criteria for professional fulfillment. Overall Burnout and Professional Fulfillment scores were not affected by faculty rank or gender, although interpersonal disengagement was greater in faculty who had worked > 6 years at the institution ( p = .032). Responses indicated that faculty valued their work and their patients but faced an excessive workload and lacked autonomy to make changes. Faculty proposed improving efficiency, increasing staffing, and distributing work to technical staff. The PFI is a brief, no-cost instrument validated for measuring burnout and fulfillment in health care workers that can be used to assess well-being among veterinary faculty. Involving faculty in suggesting interventions may yield a variety of creative and actionable options.

Gender differences in faculty rank among academic physicians: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveMany studies have analysed gender bias in academic medicine; however, no comprehensive synthesis of the literature has been performed. We conducted a pooled analysis of the difference in the proportion of men versus women with full professorship among academic physicians.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Education Resources Information Center and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 3 July 2020.Study selectionAll original studies reporting faculty rank stratified by gender worldwide were included.Data extraction and synthesisStudy screening, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models.ResultsOur search yielded 5897 articles. 218 studies were included with 991 207 academic physician data points. Men were 2.77 times more likely to be full professors (182 271/643 790 men vs 30 349/251 501 women, OR 2.77, 95% CI 2.57 to 2.98). Although men practised for longer (median 18 vs 12 years, p<0.00002), the gender gap remained after pooling seven studies that adjusted for factors including time in practice, specialty, publications, h-index, additional PhD and institution (adjusted OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.20). Meta-regression by data collection year demonstrated improvement over time (p=0.0011); however, subgroup analysis showed that gender disparities remain significant in the 2010–2020 decade (OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.48 to 2.80). The gender gap was present across all specialties and both within and outside of North America. Men published more papers (mean difference 17.2, 95% CI 14.7 to 19.7), earned higher salaries (mean difference $33 256, 95% CI $25 969 to $40 542) and were more likely to be departmental chairs (OR 2.61, 95% CI 2.19 to 3.12).ConclusionsGender inequity in academic medicine exists across all specialties, geographical regions and multiple measures of success, including academic rank, publications, salary and leadership. Men are more likely than women to be full professors after controlling for experience, academic productivity and specialty. Although there has been some improvement over time, the gender disparity in faculty rank persists.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020197414.

Abstract 30: Sex Differences in Faculty Rank Among Academic Vascular Neurologists in the United States

Introduction: The lower proportion of women at the rank of full professor compared to men has been documented in nearly all specialties. Women are under-represented in academic stroke neurology, but there is limited data. Methods: We reviewed all 160 U.S. medical schools and the associated medical centers for vascular neurologists. An internet search of stroke team websites and neurology department websites was performed from August 1, 2020 to August 25, 2020. We included 117 academic medical centers that had at least 1 vascular neurologist on faculty. We included vascular neurology ABPN certified or board eligible (fellowship-trained) neurologists. Data was collected on sex, academic rank, and American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) certification status. ABPN board certification status was verified on the ABPN verify CERT website. Social medical women’s neurology groups were also queried for names of women full professor to cross check. Results: Among 540 academic ABPN vascular neurologists, 182 (33.8%) were women and 358 (66.3%) were men. Among academic ranks, women made up 108/269 (40.1%) of Assistant professors, 49/137 (35.8%) of Associate professors, and 25/134 (18.8%) of full professors. Twenty two academic centers had vascular neurology female professors on faculty, compared to 70 academic centers with male full professors on faculty. Twenty nine academic centers had multiple male professors on faculty compared to only 3 centers with multiple female full professors. Among women, 108 (59.3%) were assistant professor, 49 (26.7%) were associate professor, 25 (13.7%) were full professor. Among men, 161 (45.0%) were assistant professor, 88 (24.6%) were associate professor, and 109 (30.5%) were professor. There was a significant difference between academic rank based upon sex (p <0.0001). Conclusion: Among academic medical centers in the United States, significant sex differences were observed in academic faculty rank for ABPN vascular neurologists, with women less likely than men to be full professors. Further study is warranted to address the gender gap in the field of stroke.

Correlation of surgeon radiology assessment with laparoscopic disease site scoring in patients with advanced ovarian cancer

BackgroundRadiographic triage measures in patients with new advanced ovarian cancer have yielded inconsistent results.ObjectiveTo determine the correlation between surgeon radiology assessment and laparoscopic scoring by disease sites in patients with newly diagnosed advanced stage ovarian cancer.MethodsFourteen gynecologic oncology surgeons from a single institution performed a blinded review of pre-operative contrast-enhanced CT imaging from patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. Each of the patients had also undergone laparoscopic scoring assessment, between April 2013 and December 2017, to determine primary resectability using the validated Fagotti scoring method, and assigned a predictive index value score. Surgeons were asked to provide expected predictive index value scores based on their blinded review of the antecedent CT imaging. Linear mixed models were conducted to calculate the correlation between radiologic and laparoscopic score for surgeons individually, and as a group. Once the model was fit, the inter-class correlation and 95% CI were calculated.ResultsRadiology review was performed on 20 patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer who underwent laparoscopic scoring assessment. Surgeon faculty rank included assistant professor (n=5), associate professor (p=4), and professor (n=5). The kappa inter-rater agreement was −0.017 (95% CI −0.023 to −0.005), indicating low inter-rater agreement between radiology review and actual laparoscopic score. The inter-class correlation in this model was 0.06 (0.02–0.21), indicating that surgeons do not score the same across all the images. When using a clinical cut-off point for the predictive index value of 8, the probability of agreement between radiology and actual laparoscopic score was 0.56 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.73). Examination of disease site sub-scales showed that the probability of agreement was as follows: peritoneum 0.57 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.62), diaphragm 0.54 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.60), mesentery 0.51 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.57), omentum 0.61 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.67), bowel 0.54 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.64), stomach 0.71 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.76), and liver 0.36 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.42). The number of laparoscopic scoring cases, tumor reductive surgery cases, or faculty rank was not significantly associated with overall or sub-scale agreement.ConclusionsSurgeon radiology review did not correlate highly with actual laparoscopic scoring assessment findings in patients with advanced stage ovarian cancer. Our study highlights the limited accuracy of surgeon radiographic assessment to determine resectability.

Teaching Load and Other Determinants of Research Output Among University Faculty

Do faculty who teach more produce less research? We revisit this question with a better measure of research productivity, eschewing simple publication counts in favor of the impact of research measured by Google citations. Using original data, we pose this question in the broader context of other determinants of scholarly productivity. We find that heavier teaching crowds out research. Furthermore, faculty with more teaching duties tend to protect the quantity of their research more than the quality. We also find that faculty rank, promotion, experience, gender, the ability to win grants, and the ranking of the resident school are significant predictors of faculty research output. JEL Classifications: I23, J24