The phenotype of academic pathology chairs

Abstract

Academic pathology departments across the United States vary greatly in terms of size, clinical workloads and research activity. It is therefore not surprising that their chairs may be an equally diverse group. However, to our knowledge, little is formally known about the “phenotype” (academic credentials, leadership background, and subspecialty focus) or career pathways of these individuals. Using a survey tool, this study sought to determine whether or not dominant phenotypes or trends. Several predominant findings emerged including: race (80% Whites), gender (68% males), dual degrees (41% MD/PhDs), years in practice (56% being in practice >15 years at time of first chair appointment), rank upon appointment (88% holding the rank of professor), and funded research (67% holding research funding). While Anatomic and Clinical Pathology (AP/CP) certified chairs represented 46% of the cohort, 30% were AP-only and another 10% were Anatomic Pathology and Neuropathology (AP/NP) certified. For subspecialty focus, neuropathology (13%) and molecular pathology (15%) were disproportionately represented compared to the general population of pathologists. Previous leadership roles on the path to chairmanship included vice chair (41%), division chief (39%), residency program director (29%), or fellowship director (27%). Many (41%) had not participated in any formal business or leadership training. This information may influence training or experience pursued by individuals aspiring to academic pathology leadership. It also highlights the challenges of suboptimal diversity in race and gender, as well as the professional backgrounds of academic pathology chairs and may suggest consideration of alternate pathways to leadership.