ArticlePediatric research2026
NIH-funded neonatologist physician-scientists: an exploration of equity and success.
Article in Pediatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe physician-scientist workforce in pediatric subspecialties is stagnant, with few trainees choosing a research-intensive career path. Limited data are available on the physician-scientist workforce in neonatal-perinatal medicine.
methodsWe performed an anonymous national survey among NIH-funded physician-scientists in neonatal-perinatal medicine with a response rate of 53%. The survey included questions measuring funding, organizational support, personal and professional obligations, academic accomplishments, and career satisfaction.
resultsDifferences within gender identity, career stage, international medical graduate status, or underrepresented in medicine were compared. Among these groupings, we found gender identity to be the most common factor associated with significant differences. Among these, the total number of publications for women was lower at 23 versus 88 (p = 0.014) for mid-career and 70 versus 185 (p = 0.014) for late-career women compared to men. Women more commonly reported periods of time-off from their careers (43% versus 13%, p = 0.005), with childbirth being the most common reason. Most respondents reported satisfaction with their career as a physician-scientist. Greater concerns for balance between personal and professional time and increases in multiple measures of burnout were reported by women physician-scientists.
conclusionThese results identify additional actions to promote entry into and success along the neonatologist physician-scientist career pathway. IMPACT: This is the first paper to examine, with high granularity, the professional and personal characteristics of NIH-funded physician-scientists in neonatology. This study identifies areas where professional experiences differ from professional group recommendations and where additional equity work may benefit those along the physician-scientist career pathway. By understanding NIH-funded neonatologists' professional experiences and accomplishments, efforts to foster the success of all those following this career path can be better informed.
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.