Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23255964›Full record

ArticleGMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung2012

Quantitative evaluation of the requirements for the promotion as associate professor at German medical faculties.

Heiko Sorg, Karsten Knobloch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Status Quo - The requirements for medical habilitation in Germany].Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Postdoctoral lecturer thesis in medicine: academic competence or career booster?].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2016
    Article
  8. Being an Associate Professor.Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Heiko SorgDepartment of Plastic, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. sorg.heiko@mh-hannover.de
Karsten Knobloch

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFirst quantitative evaluation of the requirements for the promotion as associate professor (AP) at German medical faculties. MATERIAL AND

methodsAnalysis of the AP-regulations of German medical faculties according to a validated scoring system, which has been adapted to this study.

resultsThe overall scoring for the AP-requirements at 35 German medical faculties was 13.5±0.6 of 20 possible scoring points (95% confidence interval 12.2-14.7). More than 88% of the AP-regulations demand sufficient performance in teaching and research with adequate scientific publication. Furthermore, 83% of the faculties expect an expert review of the candidate's performance. Conference presentations required as an assistant professor as well as the reduction of the minimum time as an assistant professor do only play minor roles.

conclusionThe requirements for assistant professors to get nominated as an associate professor at German medical faculties are high with an only small range. In detail, however, it can be seen that there still exists large heterogeneity, which hinders equal opportunities and career possibilities. These data might be used for the ongoing objective discussion.

Indexed as

Career MobilityFaculty, MedicalJob ApplicationPersonnel SelectionGermanyHumansassociate professorequality of opportunitiesGerman Medical Facultiesscoring systemstandardization

Identifiers

PMID23255964
PMCPMC3525914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.