ArticleATS scholar2026
Variability in first academic medicine job offers in pulmonary and critical care medicine.
Article in ATS scholar, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- What breaks when federal commitments break: comment on Beccia et al.SSM. Mental health · 2026Article
- Knowing your worth: a review of initial pulmonary and critical care academic offers.ATS scholar · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA minority of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM) graduates pursue careers in academic medicine. Although compensation is only a portion of the career decision, job negotiations remain shrouded in ambiguity and inconsistency. Additionally, while role-level salary tables exist through the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), to our knowledge there is no resource that includes important non-salary.
objectiveWe sought to describe key components of first PCCM academic job offers for both physician scientists and clinician educators, including salary, start-up packages, non-clinical full-time equivalent (FTE) breakdown, and bonus ranges.
methodsAn electronic survey was distributed via a snowball sampling method between May-June 2025. PCCM graduates between 2020 and 2025 who accepted a job in academic medicine were included. Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon tests were used for ordinal comparisons. Qualitative analysis of free text responses was performed with a social cognitive career theory framework.
resultsThere were 60 respondents who provided information about 103 job offers, with 50% (14/28) of physician-scientists and 66% (21/32) of clinician-educators reporting more than one job offer. Physician-scientists received lower salary offers compared to clinician-educators (respective median ranges: $150 000-$199 999 vs $250 000-$299 999, P < .001). Only 35.7% of physician-scientists (10/28) received a career development award prior to negotiation, which was associated with a higher start-up package offer (P < .05). For all clinician-educator jobs (n = 59), 42.4% had non-clinical FTE in the initial offer. Many respondents commented on the lack of negotiating power.
conclusionPCCM physician-scientists and clinician-educators experience wide variability in their initial job offers. Recognizing differences is essential to improve transparency in job negotiations in academic medicine.
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.