Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37188085›Full record

ArticleWomen's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)2023

Satellite Faculty in an Academic Ophthalmology Department: Junior, Clinical, and Female.

Laxmi Devisetty, Shelby Smith, Irene C Kuo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Laxmi DevisettyWilmer Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2755-5108
Shelby SmithDepartment of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Irene C KuoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the perception of physicians at satellite offices of a large academic ophthalmology department. Methods: A survey was sent to the 32 physician faculty members working at the satellite offices in the Ophthalmology Department of the University of Michigan. The ophthalmologists answered 44 survey questions on staffing, wait times, physician satisfaction, patient satisfaction, compensation, administrative help, research, and operations management. Results: Seventeen (53%) satellite ophthalmologists responded. The majority were satisfied with work at satellites, which they felt operated efficiently and believed to feature high patient satisfaction. A minority of ophthalmologists had concerns about salary, volume, marketing support, and geographic location. Some respondents did not understand the compensation structure, satellites' finances, or contribution to the overall department. Most described a lack of research and resident teaching opportunities at satellites. Conclusions: The perceptions of ophthalmologists who work in satellite offices are important because of the growth of these offices in academic medical centers and the ability for satellite doctors to offer care comparable with and sooner than doctors at the main hospital at locations convenient for patients. Satellite ophthalmologists at this academic center would appreciate increased transparency of compensation and financial structures; administrative help with marketing and maintaining efficiency, which doctors and patients enjoy at satellite offices; and more teaching and research opportunities, which are the basis of academic advancement. Such efforts may help retain satellite doctors, who tend to be junior in rank, female, nontenured faculty, and who experience a higher turnover rate than faculty at the main campus.

Indexed as

academic advancementacademic ophthalmologyfaculty satisfactionleadershipsatellite practiceswomen's status

Identifiers

PMID37188085
PMCPMC10181801

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.