For Residents
![](https://cdn-uat.mdedge.com/files/s3fs-public/styles/max_width_small/public/images/article_teasers/CU_Martires_Carousel.jpg)
Factors Affecting Academic Leadership in Dermatology
Although prior studies have examined methods by which to recruit and retain academic dermatologists, few have examined factors that are important...
Drs. A.M John, Lopez, Lee, and Lambert, as well as Mr. Gupta, are from the Department of Dermatology, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark. Dr. E.S. John is from the Department of Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Correspondence: Ann M. John, MD, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Medical Science Bldg, H-576, 185 South Orange Ave, Newark, NJ 07103 (ann.m.john@gmail.com).
An increasing number of dermatology residents are pursuing postresidency fellowships to augment their knowledge in dermatology subspecialties. The purpose of this study was to determine whether fellowship training affects the scholarly impact of academic dermatologists, as measured by the h-index. A secondary objective was to compare scholarly productivity among different dermatology subspecialties. Overall, fellowship training is associated with increased scholarly impact; however, when stratifying for academic rank and years of publication activity, this difference does not exist.
Practice Points
The percentage of dermatology residents pursuing fellowship training is steadily increasing. A report from the American Board of Dermatology described an increase in the percentage of residents entering fellowships approved by the American Board of Dermatology and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education from 10% in 2006 to 24% in 2010.1 The American Medical Association Residency & Fellowship Database FREIDA Online showed that 30% of dermatology residents or fellows pursued further fellowship training in 2013.2 The number of dermatology fellowship positions offered also is steadily increasing. Data from SF Match showed that the number of participating applicants in Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) fellowships increased from 64 in 2002 to 86 in 2014, and the number of programs increased from 48 to 56, respectively.3 Similarly, in pediatric dermatology the SF Match reported an increase from 14 to 22 in participating applicants and an increase in available programs from 14 to 20 in 2009 and 2012, respectively.4 Reports on dermatopathology programs also have suggested either a stable or increased percentage of residents pursuing fellowships in this specialty.5,6
There are several reported factors that influence the pursuit of dermatology fellowships. Fellows often hope to gain further exposure to a dermatology subspecialty,7 which is especially applicable to procedural dermatology, as the prevailing opinion among dermatologists is that residency training should emphasize medical dermatology much more than surgery.8,9 Increased financial compensation, responsibility to provide for a family, and increased levels of educational debt do not notably influence the desire to pursue a fellowship, though these factors often play a role in the decision to pursue a career in academia.6,10-12 Additionally, it has been reported that fellowship-trained dermatologists are more likely to teach students, residents, and fellows and are up to 8 times more likely to participate in research than non–fellowship-trained dermatologists.6,8,11 Research activity also correlates with the decision to pursue an academic career. As such, fellowship training may present physicians with opportunities to improve clinical care, garner more research opportunities, and advance in academic rank.13
Scholarly productivity, measured by contribution to research, is a heavily weighted factor when hiring and promoting within academic medicine.14-17 Despite the importance of scholarly productivity, it is difficult to accurately quantify the measure. Commonly used metrics include number of publications, number of citations, amount of National Institutes of Health funding, number of research presentations, and number of lectures.18,19 However, taken individually, none of these measures entirely represents an individual’s research contribution. For example, a physician may have a large number of relatively low-quality publications. Additionally, if considering the number of citations, one of an author’s publications may have many citations, while the remaining publications do not.
The h-index, introduced in 2005 by Hirsch,20,21 is a measure of academic productivity that takes into account both the quantity and impact of research measured by recording the number of published articles and the number of citations in peer-reviewed journals. A high h-index indicates a high number of significant publications. For example, if a physician has 10 published articles cited 10 times each, his/her h-index is 10. Another physician with an h-index of 10 may have published 50 articles, which indicates that the remaining 40 articles were cited fewer than 10 times. Prior studies on the use of the h-index in fields as diverse as otolaryngology, radiology, anesthesiology, neurosurgery, ophthalmology, and urology indicate a strong association between the h-index and academic rank.22-28 Other studies indicate that fellowship-trained individuals tend to have a higher h-index than their non–fellowship-trained counterparts.29,30 One study demonstrated that fellowship-trained dermatologic surgeons had significantly increased academic productivity (P=.001), as measured by the number of publications in PubMed, compared to non–fellowship-trained dermatologic surgeons.11
The goal of this study was to determine whether dermatology fellowship training impacts scholarly productivity and academic promotion. Additionally, the scholarly productivity of procedural dermatology/MMS, dermatopathology, and pediatric dermatology fellows is compared to determine if type of subspecialty affects research productivity.
Methods
A list of academic dermatology departments was accessed using FREIDA Online. Individual departmental websites were visited to compile a list of academic faculty members. Additional recorded data included academic rank, gender, and fellowship training. Academic rank was classified as assistant professor, associate professor, professor, and chair. Physicians listed as chairs were not listed as professors to avoid duplication of these individuals. Voluntary, nonclinical, and nonacademic faculty members were excluded from the analysis. Departments that did not list the academic rank of faculty members also were excluded. Faculty members were organized by fellowship type: procedural dermatology/MMS, dermatopathology, pediatric dermatology, other fellowship, and no fellowship. Individuals with multiple fellowships were counted in multiple categories.
Although prior studies have examined methods by which to recruit and retain academic dermatologists, few have examined factors that are important...
International resident opportunities in dermatology allow residents to become immersed in different systems of medical care and expose physicians...
There is a shortage of academic dermatologists in the United States. This study aimed to examine characteristics of US dermatology residency...