ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Distribution of Research and Clinical Productivity among US Ophthalmologists, 2021 to 2023: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To quantify the association between research output and Medicare-weighted clinical volume among ophthalmologists and to examine variation by gender, career stage, and institution. Design: Cross-sectional study linking PubMed publications (January 1, 2021-December 31, 2023) to the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System and Medicare Part B claims data. Subjects: US ophthalmologists with at least one PubMed-indexed publication during 2021 to 2023 (N = 2914). For location-based analyses, 2684 after excluding 230 lacking geographic data. Methods: Calculated a publication score using fractionally weighted authorship credits with multipliers based on journal impact factor and estimated Medicare-weighted clinical volume as annualized work relative value units (RVUs) from Medicare claims (scaled from 5% sample). Defined a composite productivity metric as publication score × RVU. Conducted descriptive analyses, Spearman correlation between publication score and RVUs, and comparisons by gender and years in practice. Main Outcome Measures: Our primary outcomes included publication score, annualized work RVUs, and composite publication score × RVU. Results: Among 2684 ophthalmologists (1764 men [65.7%], 920 women [34.3%]; median years in practice, 19), median publication score was 0.41 (interquartile range, 0.04-2.19). and median RVUs were 2792 (interquartile range, 982-6246). Publication score and RVUs were weakly inversely correlated (Spearman r = -0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.16 to - 0.10). Women and men had similar publication scores (median, 0.52 vs. 0.36; difference, 0.16; 95% CI, -0.02‑0.32) but women performed fewer RVUs (median, 1833 vs. 3750; difference, -1917; 95% CI, -2112 to -1722). The composite score × RVU peaked at 21 to 30 years in practice (median, 1436) and was highest in Maryland (median, 6111). Five flagship eye centers accounted for 24% of national publication credit and 34% of combined productivity. Conclusions: Among publishing ophthalmologists, research output showed only a small trade-off with clinical workload. Women published at rates comparable to men despite lower Medicare volumes, and peak combined productivity occurred mid-career. Operationally, these data support piloting protected research time and equitable workload targets without materially reducing clinical throughput, while using regional partnerships to diffuse research opportunities. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.