ArticleAcademic pathology
The phenotype of academic pathology chairs.
Article in Academic pathology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender differences in appointments to pathology department interim chair positions and subsequent advancement to permanent chair positions.Academic pathologyArticle
- The phenotype of pathology residency program directors.Academic pathologyArticle
- Leadership perspectives on osteopathic medical school applicants to pathology residency training.Academic pathologyArticle
- Evolution of diversity and inclusion excellence within an academic pathology professional organization: historical perspective, progress, and a model for others.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Academic pathology departments across the United States vary greatly in terms of size, clinical workloads and research activity. It is therefore not surprising that their chairs may be an equally diverse group. However, to our knowledge, little is formally known about the "phenotype" (academic credentials, leadership background, and subspecialty focus) or career pathways of these individuals. Using a survey tool, this study sought to determine whether or not dominant phenotypes or trends. Several predominant findings emerged including: race (80% Whites), gender (68% males), dual degrees (41% MD/PhDs), years in practice (56% being in practice >15 years at time of first chair appointment), rank upon appointment (88% holding the rank of professor), and funded research (67% holding research funding). While Anatomic and Clinical Pathology (AP/CP) certified chairs represented 46% of the cohort, 30% were AP-only and another 10% were Anatomic Pathology and Neuropathology (AP/NP) certified. For subspecialty focus, neuropathology (13%) and molecular pathology (15%) were disproportionately represented compared to the general population of pathologists. Previous leadership roles on the path to chairmanship included vice chair (41%), division chief (39%), residency program director (29%), or fellowship director (27%). Many (41%) had not participated in any formal business or leadership training. This information may influence training or experience pursued by individuals aspiring to academic pathology leadership. It also highlights the challenges of suboptimal diversity in race and gender, as well as the professional backgrounds of academic pathology chairs and may suggest consideration of alternate pathways to leadership.
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.