skip to main content
Idioma:

Scholarly activity following National Institutes of Health Women’s Reproductive Health Research K12 training—a cohort study

McCoy, Erin E. ; Katz, Ronit ; Louden, Diana K.N. ; Oshima, Emiko ; Murtha, Amy ; Gyamfi-Bannerman, Cynthia ; Santoro, Nanette ; Howell, Elizabeth A. ; Halvorson, Lisa ; Reed, Susan D. ; Goff, Barbara A.

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2023-10, Vol.229 (4), p.425.e1-425.e16 [Periódico revisado por pares]

Elsevier Inc

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    Scholarly activity following National Institutes of Health Women’s Reproductive Health Research K12 training—a cohort study
  • Autor: McCoy, Erin E. ; Katz, Ronit ; Louden, Diana K.N. ; Oshima, Emiko ; Murtha, Amy ; Gyamfi-Bannerman, Cynthia ; Santoro, Nanette ; Howell, Elizabeth A. ; Halvorson, Lisa ; Reed, Susan D. ; Goff, Barbara A.
  • Assuntos: bibliometrics ; grant funding ; K12 ; National Institutes of Health Institutional Career Development Award ; obstetrician-gynecologist physician-scientist ; publication impact ; Women’s Reproductive Health Research
  • É parte de: American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2023-10, Vol.229 (4), p.425.e1-425.e16
  • Notas: ObjectType-Article-1
    SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
    ObjectType-Feature-2
    content type line 23
  • Descrição: National Institutes of Health funding to address basic reproductive health for common female conditions remains disproportionately low, in part because of low success rates of grant applications by obstetrician-gynecologists. This study aimed to evaluate the scholarly productivity of individuals supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Women’s Reproductive Health Research K12 career development award, created to advance careers of obstetrician-gynecologist physician-scientists. We performed a cohort study of individuals who completed at least 2 years of Women’s Reproductive Health Research training by June 30, 2015, and had at least 5-year follow-up. Earliest training start date was December 1, 1998. Primary outcomes from public data sources (National Institutes of Health RePORTER, PubMed, iCite) were (1) number of total and R01 National Institutes of Health grants as principal investigator; (2) numbers of total and first and last author publications; and (3) median and highest publication impact factor measured by the relative citation ratio. Secondary outcomes from an email survey subcohort were total number of research grants, federally funded grants, and number of National Institutes of Health grants as coinvestigator; institutional promotions and academic appointments, national and National Institutes of Health leadership roles; and career and mentorship satisfaction. Outcomes were recorded at 5, 10, and 15 years postgraduation, and aggregate anonymized data were divided into 3 groups using Women’s Reproductive Health Research completion dates: June 30 of 2005, 2010, and 2015. Temporal trends were assessed. Results were stratified by gender, number of awarded grant cycles (1–2 vs 3–4), and specialty type. Analyses used Fisher exact or Pearson chi-square tests, and Mantel–Haenszel tests of trend. The distribution of the cohort (N=178) by graduation completion date was: on or before June 30, 2005 (57 [32%]); July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2010 (60 [34%]); and July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2015 (61 [34%]). Most participants were female (112 [64%]) and maternal–fetal medicine trained (53 [30%]), followed by no fellowship (50 [28%]). Of the 178 participants, 72 (40%) received additional National Institutes of Health funding as a principal investigator, 45 (25%) received at least 1 R01, and 23 (13%) received 2 to 5 R01s. There were 52 (31%) scholars with >10 first author publications, 66 (39%) with >10 last author publications, and 108 (63%) with ≥25 publications. The highest relative citation ratio was a median of 8.07 (interquartile range, 4.20–15.16). There were 121 (71%) scholars with relative citation ratio ≥5, indicating >5-fold greater publication impact than that of other National Institutes of Health–funded scientists in similar areas of research. No differences by gender, institution, or temporal trends were observed. Of the full cohort, 69 (45.7%) responded to the survey; most self-identified as women (50 [73%]) and White (51 [74%]). Our findings suggest that the infrastructure provided by an institutional K award is an advantageous career development award mechanism for obstetrician-gynecologists, a group of predominantly women surgeons. It may serve as a corrective for the known inequities in National Institutes of Health funding by gender.
  • Editor: Elsevier Inc
  • Idioma: Inglês
Voltar para lista de resultados

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.