Demographic and Academic Productivity Trends Among American Head & Neck Society Fellows Over a 20-Year Period

Abstract

ImportanceHistorical data reveal that, compared with women, men are more likely to pursue a head and neck surgical oncology fellowship, but little is known about possible gender differences in academic productivity.ObjectiveTo assess demographic trends and academic productivity among American Head & Neck Society (AHNS) fellowship graduates.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study used electronically published data from the AHNS on fellowship graduates in the US and Canada from July 1, 1997, to June 30, 2022. Scopus was used to extract h-indices for each graduate.ExposureScholarly activity.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were changes in demographic characteristics and academic productivity among AHNS graduates over time. Data analysis included effect size, η2, and 95% CIs.ResultsA total of 691 AHNS fellowship graduates (525 men [76%] and 166 women [24%]) were included. Over the study period, there was an increase in the number of programs offering a fellowship (η2, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89) and an increase in the absolute number of women who completed training (η2, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.38-0.78). Among early-career graduates pursuing an academic career, there was a small difference in the median h-index scores between men and women (median difference, 1.0; 95% CI, −1.1 to 3.1); however, among midcareer and late-career graduates, there was a large difference in the median h-index scores (midcareer graduates: median difference, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.2-6.8; late-career graduates: median difference, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.0-10.9). A higher percentage of women pursued academic positions compared with men (106 of 162 [65.4%] vs 293 of 525 [55.8%]; difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, −5.3% to 12.3%).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cross-sectional study suggests that women in head and neck surgery begin their careers with high levels of academic productivity. However, over time, a divergence in academic productivity between men and women begins to develop. These data argue for research to identify possible reasons for this observed divergence in academic productivity and, where possible, develop enhanced early faculty development opportunities for women to promote their academic productivity, promotion, and advancement into leadership positions.

Factors Associated with Research Productivity and National Institutes of Health Funding in Academic Otology

“…24,25 A more recent study of American Head & Neck Society fellowship graduates found that early in career men and women had similar hindex scores and that the difference in h-index widened as surgeons progressed through their careers. 26 The findings of our study align with the initial studies and show that at a career duration of 11-20 years, men have higher h-index and w-RCR than women, with all other bibliometrics being similar across career duration. When stratified by academic rank, among assistant professors, men had higher h-index than women, with similar research productivity across higher academic ranks.…”

“…1). Men had higher median (IQR) h-index (16 [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] vs 9 [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]) and w-RCR (51.8 [17.4-101.2] vs. 23.0 [13.0-37.4]) than women (both p < 0.001) (Table IV). Men and women had similar m-RCRs (1.3 [1.0-1.9] vs. 1.3 [1.0-1.8], p = 0.269).…”

“…Academic rank was not significantly associated with m-RCR (p = 0.056). However, full professors had higher h-index (29 [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] vs. 14 [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]) and w-RCR (99.9 [51. 6-198.8] vs. 32.7 [14.0-66.3]) than associate professors; associate professors had higher h-index (14 [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] vs. 9 [5][6][7][8][9][10]…”

‘Seeing is believing’ – gender disparities in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery in Africa: a narrative review

“…Over time, there has been an increase in the representation of females in academic otolaryngology in HICs [19 ▪ ,20,21], although discrepancies continue to be documented in academic medicine.…”