ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2017
Using Organizational Philosophy to Create a Self-Sustaining Compensation Plan Without Harming Academic Missions.
Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Educational Relative Value Units as a Measure of Academic Productivity: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2023Review
- Financial Models for an Academic Practice in Plastic Surgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Imposter Syndrome and the Peer-Review Crisis.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2021Article
- Faculty Development: How Do We Encourage Faculty to Become Better Teachers and Mentors?Current urology reports · 2020Review
- A Multifaceted Organizational Physician Assessment Program: Validity Evidence and Implications for the Use of Performance Data.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2017Article
- The Evolution of Earned, Transparent, and Quantifiable Faculty Salary Compensation: The Johns Hopkins Pathology Experience.Academic pathologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
problemAcademic physician reimbursement has moved to productivity-based compensation plans. To be sustainable, such plans must be self-funding. Additionally, unless research and education are appropriately valued, faculty involved in these efforts will become disillusioned, yet revenue generation in these activities is less robust than for clinical care activities. APPROACH: Faculty at the Department of Medicine, University of Florida Health, elected a committee of junior and senior faculty and division chiefs to restructure the compensation plan in fiscal year (FY) 2011. This committee was charged with designing a new compensation plan based on seven principles of organizational philosophy: equity, compensation coupled to productivity, authority aligned with responsibility, respect for all academic missions, transparency, professionalism, and self-funding in each academic mission. OUTCOMES: The new compensation plan was implemented in FY2013. A survey administered at the end of FY2015 showed that 61% (76/125) of faculty were more satisfied with this plan than the previous plan. Since the year before implementation, clinical relative value units per faculty increased 7% (from 3,458 in FY2012 to 3,704 in FY2015, P < .002), incentives paid per faculty increased 250% (from $3,191 in FY2012 to $11,153 in FY2015, P ≤ .001), and publications per faculty increased 15% (from 2.6 in FY2012 to 3.0 in FY2015, P < .001). Grant submissions, external funding, and teaching hours also increased per faculty but did not reach statistical significance. NEXT STEPS: An important next step will be to incorporate quality metrics into the compensation plan, without affecting costs or throughput.
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.