ArticleAdvances in cancer education and quality improvement2025
The Impact of Fellowship Training on Peer-Reviewed Publication Productivity in Academic Anesthesiologists as Evaluated by the h-Index.
Article in Advances in cancer education and quality improvement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The effect of anesthesiology fellowships on scholarly contributions has been minimally studied. In this study we analyzed differences in h-index between fellowship-trained and non-fellowship-trained anesthesiologists, as well as by type of fellowship, academic rank, and years in practice. Methods: All anesthesiologists on staff between September 1, 2021, and August 31, 2022, were included in this study. The variables collected were fellowship training status, h-index, total number of publications, years in practice, academic rank, and years at the institution. For analysis, the anesthesiologists were divided into 2 groups: those with fellowship training and those without. Results: Among 78 anesthesiologists, 40 were not fellowship-trained and 38 were, with 10 types of anesthesiology fellowships identified. The h-index and number of publications did not differ between fellowship-trained and non-fellowship-trained anesthesiologists, and the number of publications per years in practice did not differ by fellowship type. The number of publications per years in practice was higher in the fellowship-trained group than in the non-fellowship-trained group (1.2 ± 1.1 vs. 0.71 ± 0.6; P = .04), as was the number of publications per years in practice at our institution (1.5 ± 1.1 compared with 0.9 ± 0.9; P = .0093). Conclusion: Fellowship training among academic anesthesiologists was not associated with a difference in h-index. However, fellowship training was associated with a higher number of publications per years in practice. Further research could elucidate the usefulness of h-index to support career development and contributions of anesthesiologists in academia.
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.