ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
Faculty Recruitment and Retention in Academic Plastic Surgery.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Academic plastic surgery continues to face challenges in recruiting and retaining faculty. Although prior studies have reported rising faculty attrition, updated national data in academic plastic surgery reflecting recent workforce and institutional changes are lacking. Methods: A 29-item electronic survey was distributed in March to April of 2025 to chairs and chiefs of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited plastic surgery programs. The survey assessed trends during the past decade in faculty hiring, resignation, compensation, mentorship, benefits, and retention strategies. Results: Thirty-five programs (43.8% response rate) were included. Faculty recruitment was concentrated at the assistant professor level, with an average of 1.7, 4.3, and 6.5 faculty added during the past 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Concurrently, faculty losses averaged 0.4, 2.2, and 3.0, with turnover rates of 4.2%, 29.1%, and 38.9% during the past 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Retention rates declined over time, from 95.8% at 1 year to 61.1% at 10 years, with only 8.6% of programs having a formal retention committee. Family considerations (54.3%) and inadequate compensation (34.3%) were the most cited reasons for faculty departure. Reported retention strategies included competitive compensation packages (80.0%), professional development initiatives (74.3%), mentorship programs (65.7%), and work-life balance accommodations (45.7%), awards and recognition (37.1%), and flexible scheduling (28.6%). Conclusions: Despite continued faculty growth, long-term retention remains a significant challenge in academic plastic surgery. Compensation alone does not seem sufficient to ensure faculty longevity. Broader institutional strategies, including formal retention committee creation, are needed to sustain faculty engagement and ensure workforce stability in the decade ahead.
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.