Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38756177›Full record

ArticleHealth affairs scholar2024

Re-evaluation of the methodology for estimating the US specialty physician workforce.

W Stephen Black-Schaffer, David J Gross, Zakia Nouri, Aidan DeLisle, Michael Dill, Jason Y Park, James M Crawford, Michael B Cohen, Rebecca L Johnson, Donald S Karcher and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health affairs scholar, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

W Stephen Black-SchafferDepartment of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3631-7520
David J GrossPolicy Roundtable, College of American Pathologists, Washington, DC 20001, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5660-0840
Zakia NouriWorkforce Studies, Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, DC 20001, United States.
Aidan DeLislePolicy Roundtable, College of American Pathologists, Washington, DC 20001, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9398-795X
Michael DillWorkforce Studies, Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, DC 20001, United States.
Jason Y ParkDepartment of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX 75390, United States.
James M CrawfordDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Northwell Health, New Hyde Park, NY 11040, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8581-1093
Michael B CohenDepartment of Pathology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC 27109, United States.
Rebecca L JohnsonAmerican Board of Pathology (retired), Tampa, FL 33609, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2247-5990
Donald S KarcherDepartment of Pathology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC 20052, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0958-6453
Thomas M WheelerDepartment of Pathology and Immunology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9746-1521
Stanley J RobboyDuke Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27710, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8343-9275

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasing pursuit of subspecialized training has quietly revolutionized physician training, but the potential impact on physician workforce estimates has not previously been recognized. The Physicians Specialty Data Reports of the Association of American Medical Colleges, derived from specialty designations in the American Medical Association (AMA) Physician Professional Data (PPD), are the reference source for US physician workforce estimates; by 2020, the report for pathologists was an undercount of 39% when compared with the PPD. Most of the difference was due to the omission of pathology subspecialty designations. The rest resulted from reliance on only the first of the AMA PPD's 2 specialty data fields. Placement of specialty designation in these 2 fields is sensitive to sequence of training and is thus affected by multiple or intercalated (between years of residency training) fellowships. Both these phenomena have become progressively more common and are not unique to pathology. Our findings demonstrate the need to update definitions and methodology underlying estimates of the US physician workforce for pathology and suggest a like need in other specialties affected by similar trends.

Indexed as

AMA Physician Professional Datapathologyphysician supplyphysician workforcesubspecialization

Identifiers

PMID38756177
PMCPMC11034525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.