矫形外科住院医师培训项目排名与领导力现状："顶级 "项目的领导者有哪些特点？

IF 0.2 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS

Current Orthopaedic Practice Pub Date : 2023-11-16 DOI:10.1097/bco.0000000000001247

Fernando A. Huyke-Hernández, Stephen A. Doxey, Lily J. Qian, Brian P. Cunningham

{"title":"矫形外科住院医师培训项目排名与领导力现状：\"顶级 \"项目的领导者有哪些特点？","authors":"Fernando A. Huyke-Hernández, Stephen A. Doxey, Lily J. Qian, Brian P. Cunningham","doi":"10.1097/bco.0000000000001247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Orthopaedic surgery residency program ranking and leadership can influence applicant and program decision-making. The study objective was to evaluate the relationship between program rankings and characteristics of their leadership. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Doximity, and program-specific websites were queried, identifying 193 programs and 426 leaders for analysis. Leadership positions evaluated included: Chairs, Vice Chairs, Program Directors, and Assistant Program Directors. Residency programs were categorized into tiers based on 2022-2023 Doximity reputation ranking. Program ranking was stratified as follows: Tier 1 (rank 1-50, highest-ranking programs), Tier 2 (rank 51-100), Tier 3 (rank 101-150), and Tier 4 (rank 151-201, lowest-ranking programs). Leaders were described according to demographics, training, research productivity, and experience. A total of 426 leaders at 193 programs were included. The average number of leadership positions per program was 2.2±1.0. Higher-tier programs had more leadership positions and were more likely to have chairpeople (P<0.001). They also had a larger proportion of women leaders (P=0.023), although only 11.2% of leaders overall were women. Residency training outside the US did not vary across tiers (P=0.881). Higher-tier leaders were more likely to complete fellowship (P<0.001) and specialize in pediatrics, oncology, and spine (P<0.032), although trauma was the most common specialty among leaders regardless of ranking. Program rank correlated strongly with program size (number of residents) (r2=−0.69) and weakly with leadership h-index (r2=−0.33) and research documents (r2=−0.40). Rank did not correlate with years in practice (r2=0.06), years until attaining a leadership position (r2=0.06), or years in present leadership position (r2=0.07). Program ranking correlated with the number of leaders and residents, as well as research productivity, but not with years of experience or training within the US. Top-tier programs have a higher proportion of women leaders, although the overall number is still low.","PeriodicalId":10732,"journal":{"name":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","volume":"5 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Orthopaedic surgery residency program ranking and the current state of leadership: what are the characteristics of the leaders in the “Top-tier” programs?\",\"authors\":\"Fernando A. Huyke-Hernández, Stephen A. Doxey, Lily J. Qian, Brian P. Cunningham\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/bco.0000000000001247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Orthopaedic surgery residency program ranking and leadership can influence applicant and program decision-making. The study objective was to evaluate the relationship between program rankings and characteristics of their leadership. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Doximity, and program-specific websites were queried, identifying 193 programs and 426 leaders for analysis. Leadership positions evaluated included: Chairs, Vice Chairs, Program Directors, and Assistant Program Directors. Residency programs were categorized into tiers based on 2022-2023 Doximity reputation ranking. Program ranking was stratified as follows: Tier 1 (rank 1-50, highest-ranking programs), Tier 2 (rank 51-100), Tier 3 (rank 101-150), and Tier 4 (rank 151-201, lowest-ranking programs). Leaders were described according to demographics, training, research productivity, and experience. A total of 426 leaders at 193 programs were included. The average number of leadership positions per program was 2.2±1.0. Higher-tier programs had more leadership positions and were more likely to have chairpeople (P<0.001). They also had a larger proportion of women leaders (P=0.023), although only 11.2% of leaders overall were women. Residency training outside the US did not vary across tiers (P=0.881). Higher-tier leaders were more likely to complete fellowship (P<0.001) and specialize in pediatrics, oncology, and spine (P<0.032), although trauma was the most common specialty among leaders regardless of ranking. Program rank correlated strongly with program size (number of residents) (r2=−0.69) and weakly with leadership h-index (r2=−0.33) and research documents (r2=−0.40). Rank did not correlate with years in practice (r2=0.06), years until attaining a leadership position (r2=0.06), or years in present leadership position (r2=0.07). Program ranking correlated with the number of leaders and residents, as well as research productivity, but not with years of experience or training within the US. Top-tier programs have a higher proportion of women leaders, although the overall number is still low.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Orthopaedic Practice\",\"volume\":\"5 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Orthopaedic Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/bco.0000000000001247\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/bco.0000000000001247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

矫形外科住院医师培训项目的排名和领导力会影响申请人和培训项目的决策。本研究的目的是评估项目排名与其领导特点之间的关系。研究人员查询了毕业后医学教育认证委员会、Doximity 和具体项目的网站，确定了 193 个项目和 426 位领导进行分析。评估的领导职位包括主席、副主席、项目主任和项目助理主任。根据 2022-2023 年 Doximity 声誉排名，住院医师培训项目被分为不同等级。项目排名分层如下：第 1 层（排名 1-50，排名最高的项目）、第 2 层（排名 51-100）、第 3 层（排名 101-150）和第 4 层（排名 151-201，排名最低的项目）。根据人口统计学、培训、研究成果和经验对领导者进行了描述。共有 193 个项目的 426 名领导被纳入其中。每个项目的平均领导职位数为 2.2±1.0。高级别的项目拥有更多的领导职位，更有可能拥有主席（P<0.001）。这些项目中女性领导的比例也更高（P=0.023），尽管女性领导只占领导总数的11.2%。在美国以外接受过住院医师培训的人员在不同层级之间没有差异（P=0.881）。高级别的领导者更有可能完成研究员培训（P<0.001），并专攻儿科、肿瘤科和脊柱科（P<0.032），但无论级别高低，创伤科都是领导者中最常见的专业。项目排名与项目规模（住院医师人数）密切相关（r2=-0.69），与领导力H指数（r2=-0.33）和研究文献（r2=-0.40）关系不大。排名与从业年限（r2=0.06）、担任领导职务前的年限（r2=0.06）或担任现任领导职务的年限（r2=0.07）不相关。项目排名与领导者和住院医师的数量以及研究生产率相关，但与在美国的工作经验或培训年限无关。顶级项目中女性领导的比例较高，但总体人数仍然较少。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Orthopaedic surgery residency program ranking and the current state of leadership: what are the characteristics of the leaders in the “Top-tier” programs?

Orthopaedic surgery residency program ranking and leadership can influence applicant and program decision-making. The study objective was to evaluate the relationship between program rankings and characteristics of their leadership. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, Doximity, and program-specific websites were queried, identifying 193 programs and 426 leaders for analysis. Leadership positions evaluated included: Chairs, Vice Chairs, Program Directors, and Assistant Program Directors. Residency programs were categorized into tiers based on 2022-2023 Doximity reputation ranking. Program ranking was stratified as follows: Tier 1 (rank 1-50, highest-ranking programs), Tier 2 (rank 51-100), Tier 3 (rank 101-150), and Tier 4 (rank 151-201, lowest-ranking programs). Leaders were described according to demographics, training, research productivity, and experience. A total of 426 leaders at 193 programs were included. The average number of leadership positions per program was 2.2±1.0. Higher-tier programs had more leadership positions and were more likely to have chairpeople (P<0.001). They also had a larger proportion of women leaders (P=0.023), although only 11.2% of leaders overall were women. Residency training outside the US did not vary across tiers (P=0.881). Higher-tier leaders were more likely to complete fellowship (P<0.001) and specialize in pediatrics, oncology, and spine (P<0.032), although trauma was the most common specialty among leaders regardless of ranking. Program rank correlated strongly with program size (number of residents) (r2=−0.69) and weakly with leadership h-index (r2=−0.33) and research documents (r2=−0.40). Rank did not correlate with years in practice (r2=0.06), years until attaining a leadership position (r2=0.06), or years in present leadership position (r2=0.07). Program ranking correlated with the number of leaders and residents, as well as research productivity, but not with years of experience or training within the US. Top-tier programs have a higher proportion of women leaders, although the overall number is still low.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Current Orthopaedic Practice ORTHOPEDICS-

CiteScore

0.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

107

期刊介绍： Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Current Orthopaedic Practice is a peer-reviewed, general orthopaedic journal that translates clinical research into best practices for diagnosing, treating, and managing musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical research, invited special focus reviews and general reviews, as well as original articles on innovations in practice, case reports, point/counterpoint, and diagnostic imaging.