Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27456010›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2016

Publication activities of German junior researchers in academic medicine: which factors impact impact factors?

Mona Pfeiffer, Martin R Fischer, Daniel Bauer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. [Start-up grants for young scientists in German medical universities : Can the clinical scientist be saved?]Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mona PfeifferInstitut für Didaktik und Ausbildungsforschung in der Medizin, Klinikum der Universität München, Ziemssenstr. 1, 80336, Munich, Germany. Mona.pfeiffer@med.uni-muenchen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5044-525X
Martin R FischerInstitut für Didaktik und Ausbildungsforschung in der Medizin, Klinikum der Universität München, Ziemssenstr. 1, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Daniel BauerInstitut für Didaktik und Ausbildungsforschung in der Medizin, Klinikum der Universität München, Ziemssenstr. 1, 80336, Munich, Germany.
LMU Klinikum · DEUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies have shown medical students in Germany to have little interest in research while at the same time there is a lack of physician scientists. This study's aim is to investigate factors influencing publication productivity of physicians during and after finishing their medical doctorate.

methodsWe conducted a PubMed search for physicians having received their doctoral degree at Ludwig-Maxmilians-University Munich Faculty of Medicine between 2011 and 2013 (N = 924) and identified the appropriate impact factor (IF) for each journal the participants had published in. Gender, age, final grade of the doctorate, participation in a structured doctoral study program and joint publication activities between graduate and academic supervisor were defined as factors. For analyses we used nonparametric procedures.

resultsMen show significantly more publications than women. Before their doctoral graduation men publish 1.98 (SD ± 3.64) articles on average, women 1.15 (±2.67) (p < 0.0001, d = 0.27). After completion of the doctorate (up to 06/2015), 40 % of men still publish, while only 24.3 % of women (p < 0.0001, φ = 0.17) continue to publish. No differences were found concerning the value of IFs. Similar results were found regarding the variable 'participation in a structured doctoral study program'. Until doctoral graduation, program participants publish 2.82 (±5.41) articles, whereas participants doing their doctorate individually only publish 1.39 (±2.87) articles (p < 0.0001, d = 0.46). These differences persist in publication activities after graduation (45.5 vs. 29.7 %, p = 0.008, φ = 0.09). A structured doctorate seems to have positive influence on IFs (4.33 ± 2.91 vs. 3.37 ± 2.82, p = 0.006, d = 0.34). Further significant results concern the variables 'final grade' and 'age': An early doctoral graduation and an excellent or very good grade for the doctoral thesis positively influence publication productivity. Finally, joint publication activities between the graduate and his/her academic supervisor result in significantly higher IFs (3.64 ± 3.03 vs. 2.84 ± 2.25, p = 0.007, d = 0.28).

conclusionsThe study's results support the assumption about women's underrepresentation in science as well as the relevance of structured doctoral study programs for preparing and recruiting young academics in medicine for scientific careers. Promoting women and further development of structured doctoral study programs are highly recommended.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, GraduateJournal Impact FactorResearch PersonnelAcademic Dissertations as TopicAttitude of Health PersonnelBiomedical ResearchEvidence-Based MedicineGermanyPersonal AutonomyResearch ReportAcademic title Dr. medMedical doctoral trainingPublication productivity

Identifiers

PMID27456010
PMCPMC4960693
OpenAlexW2504131332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.