ArticleOral and maxillofacial surgery2015
Factors affecting scientific productivity of German oral-maxillofacial surgery training centers: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does Training Background Influence Outcomes after Coronal Scalp Incision for Treating Craniomaxillofacial Injuries?: A German Pilot Study.Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify factors associated with scientific productivity (SP) of German oral-maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) training centers. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was composed of a set of data from German OMFS training centers. A total of eight predictor variables were grouped into demographic, structural, and personal categories. The outcome variables were average publications in 2013 per senior staff, and percentage of OMFS trainees with >1 publications. Descriptive and univariate statistics were computed using P < 0.05.
resultsThe sample included outputs from 62 OMFS departments (34 [54.8 %] university-based; 46 [74.2 %] in large cities). Average publications were 2.4 ± 3 per senior staff (range, 0-27), and 160 trainees (31.7 %) published >1 papers. The number of publications and productive trainees was not linked to department name and number of female senior staffs, but publication count was significantly increased when the hospital was in a metropolis (P = 0.018) or university-based (P < 0.0001), the OMFS' chairperson and >3 staffs within the department had a postdoctoral degree (German "Habilitation") (P = 0.013 and <0.0001), and the chairperson had h-index >10 or the first/last authorship in 2013 (P < 0.0001). Female senior surgeons were less scientifically productive than the male ones (P = 0.01).
conclusionSP of German OMFS training centers is greatly different across the country and influenced by city size, university base, educational backgrounds, and research activities of chairpersons and senior staffs. This helps students, trainees, and young surgeons to reach the career choice that is personally appropriate. The involved organizations may need to encourage research output of less productive surgeons/centers. Increasing postdoctoral-qualified staffs will increase SP of the department.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.