Factors Impacting Academic Productivity and Satisfaction of Surgeon-scientists: A Nationwide Survey

Paula Marincola Smith; Amy Martinez; Rebecca Irlmeier; Carmen C Solórzano; Deepa Magge; Fei Ye; James R Goldenring

doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000006254

Factors Impacting Academic Productivity and Satisfaction of Surgeon-scientists: A Nationwide Survey

Ann Surg. 2024 Feb 29. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006254. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Paula Marincola Smith^{1

2}, Amy Martinez³, Rebecca Irlmeier⁴, Carmen C Solórzano¹, Deepa Magge¹, Fei Ye^{4

5}, James R Goldenring^{1

6}

Affiliations

¹ Section of Surgical Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
² Surgery Division, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
³ Office of Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
⁴ Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
⁵ Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
⁶ Nashville VA Medical Center, Nashville, TN.

PMID: 38437474
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006254

Abstract

Objective: To identify factors related to research success for academic surgeons.

Summary background data: Many recognize mounting barriers to scientific success for academic surgeons, but little is known about factors that predict success for individual surgeons.

Methods: A phase 1 survey was emailed to department chairpersons at highly funded US departments of surgery. Participating chairpersons distributed a phase 2 survey to their faculty surgeons. Training- and faculty-stage exposures and demographic data were collected and compared with participant-reported measures of research productivity. Five primary measures of productivity were assessed including number of grants applied for, grants funded, papers published, first/senior author papers published, and satisfaction in research.

Results: Twenty chairpersons and 464 faculty surgeons completed the survey, and 444 faculty responses were included in the final analysis. Having a research-focused degree was significantly associated with more grants applied for (PhD, incidence rate ratio (IRR)=6.93; masters, IRR=4.34) and funded (PhD, IRR=4.74; masters, IRR=4.01) compared to surgeons with only clinical degrees (all P<0.01). Having a formal research mentor was significantly associated with more grants applied for (IRR=1.57, P=0.03) and higher satisfaction in research (IRR=2.22, P<0.01). Contractually protected research time was significantly associated with more grants applied for (IRR=3.73), grants funded (IRR=2.14), papers published (IRR=2.12), first/senior authors published (IRR=1.72), and research satisfaction (Odds ratio=2.15) (all P<0.01). The primary surgeon-identified barrier to research productivity was lack of protection from clinical burden.

Conclusions: Surgeons pursuing research-focused careers should consider the benefits of attaining a research-focused degree, negotiating for contractually protected research time, and obtaining formal research mentorship.