The impact of working part-time on measures of academic productivity among general internists

Rachel B. Levine, Hilit Mechaber, Eric B. Bass, Scott M. Wright

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There is increased interest in part-time (PT) positions at academic medical centers (AMCs). Faculty and institutional leaders may have concerns about the potential for academic advancement among PT faculty. Our objective was to determine the impact of working PT on measures of academic productivity. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was mailed to PT and full-time (FT) physicians in U.S. divisions of general internal medicine. Outcome measures included publications and funding. We used multivariate analysis to identify factors associated with academic productivity. Results: The response rate was 63% (176 of 279); 91% of respondents were women (160 of 176). Compared with FT faculty, PT faculty were more often clinicians (Cs) or clinician-educators (CEs) (78% vs. 96%, p<0.001), were less likely to be fellowship trained (44% vs. 23%, p<0.001), and reported less academic support, including administrative assistance (84% vs. 67%, p=0.008), mentoring (71% vs. 54%, p=0.02), and research support (43% vs. 25%, p=0.01). PT faculty spent a greater percentage of their time in patient care (55% vs. 45%, p=0.01) and teaching (32% vs. 23%, p=0.01) and less time in research activities (5% vs. 15%, p=0.01) compared with FT faculty. Among Cs and CEs, FT faculty reported more publications (median 2, interquartile range [IQR 5] vs. median 0, IQR 1, p<0.001) and funding (odds ratio [OR] 2.85, 95% confidence internal [CI] 1.36-5.98). Multivariate analyses showed that fellowship training, mentors, academic support, and number of total years worked were associated with publications and acquisition of funding. There were no associations between working PT and publications or funding. Conclusions: PT faculty report fewer publications and grants. This may be related to insufficient training and academic support. AMCs wanting to facilitate the success of their PT faculty may need to expand the support available to them.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1995-2000
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Women's Health
Volume19
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2010

Fingerprint

Publications
Teaching
Multivariate Analysis
Training Support
Mentors
Organized Financing
Internal Medicine
Patient Care
Cross-Sectional Studies
Odds Ratio
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Physicians
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

The impact of working part-time on measures of academic productivity among general internists. / Levine, Rachel B.; Mechaber, Hilit; Bass, Eric B.; Wright, Scott M.

In: Journal of Women's Health, Vol. 19, No. 11, 01.11.2010, p. 1995-2000.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Levine, Rachel B. ; Mechaber, Hilit ; Bass, Eric B. ; Wright, Scott M. / The impact of working part-time on measures of academic productivity among general internists. In: Journal of Women's Health. 2010 ; Vol. 19, No. 11. pp. 1995-2000.
@article{2ead7930342a4d47b6352f54f86271ba,
title = "The impact of working part-time on measures of academic productivity among general internists",
abstract = "Background: There is increased interest in part-time (PT) positions at academic medical centers (AMCs). Faculty and institutional leaders may have concerns about the potential for academic advancement among PT faculty. Our objective was to determine the impact of working PT on measures of academic productivity. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was mailed to PT and full-time (FT) physicians in U.S. divisions of general internal medicine. Outcome measures included publications and funding. We used multivariate analysis to identify factors associated with academic productivity. Results: The response rate was 63{\%} (176 of 279); 91{\%} of respondents were women (160 of 176). Compared with FT faculty, PT faculty were more often clinicians (Cs) or clinician-educators (CEs) (78{\%} vs. 96{\%}, p<0.001), were less likely to be fellowship trained (44{\%} vs. 23{\%}, p<0.001), and reported less academic support, including administrative assistance (84{\%} vs. 67{\%}, p=0.008), mentoring (71{\%} vs. 54{\%}, p=0.02), and research support (43{\%} vs. 25{\%}, p=0.01). PT faculty spent a greater percentage of their time in patient care (55{\%} vs. 45{\%}, p=0.01) and teaching (32{\%} vs. 23{\%}, p=0.01) and less time in research activities (5{\%} vs. 15{\%}, p=0.01) compared with FT faculty. Among Cs and CEs, FT faculty reported more publications (median 2, interquartile range [IQR 5] vs. median 0, IQR 1, p<0.001) and funding (odds ratio [OR] 2.85, 95{\%} confidence internal [CI] 1.36-5.98). Multivariate analyses showed that fellowship training, mentors, academic support, and number of total years worked were associated with publications and acquisition of funding. There were no associations between working PT and publications or funding. Conclusions: PT faculty report fewer publications and grants. This may be related to insufficient training and academic support. AMCs wanting to facilitate the success of their PT faculty may need to expand the support available to them.",
author = "Levine, {Rachel B.} and Hilit Mechaber and Bass, {Eric B.} and Wright, {Scott M.}",
year = "2010",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/jwh.2009.1890",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "1995--2000",
journal = "Journal of Women's Health",
issn = "1540-9996",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The impact of working part-time on measures of academic productivity among general internists

AU - Levine, Rachel B.

AU - Mechaber, Hilit

AU - Bass, Eric B.

AU - Wright, Scott M.

PY - 2010/11/1

Y1 - 2010/11/1

N2 - Background: There is increased interest in part-time (PT) positions at academic medical centers (AMCs). Faculty and institutional leaders may have concerns about the potential for academic advancement among PT faculty. Our objective was to determine the impact of working PT on measures of academic productivity. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was mailed to PT and full-time (FT) physicians in U.S. divisions of general internal medicine. Outcome measures included publications and funding. We used multivariate analysis to identify factors associated with academic productivity. Results: The response rate was 63% (176 of 279); 91% of respondents were women (160 of 176). Compared with FT faculty, PT faculty were more often clinicians (Cs) or clinician-educators (CEs) (78% vs. 96%, p<0.001), were less likely to be fellowship trained (44% vs. 23%, p<0.001), and reported less academic support, including administrative assistance (84% vs. 67%, p=0.008), mentoring (71% vs. 54%, p=0.02), and research support (43% vs. 25%, p=0.01). PT faculty spent a greater percentage of their time in patient care (55% vs. 45%, p=0.01) and teaching (32% vs. 23%, p=0.01) and less time in research activities (5% vs. 15%, p=0.01) compared with FT faculty. Among Cs and CEs, FT faculty reported more publications (median 2, interquartile range [IQR 5] vs. median 0, IQR 1, p<0.001) and funding (odds ratio [OR] 2.85, 95% confidence internal [CI] 1.36-5.98). Multivariate analyses showed that fellowship training, mentors, academic support, and number of total years worked were associated with publications and acquisition of funding. There were no associations between working PT and publications or funding. Conclusions: PT faculty report fewer publications and grants. This may be related to insufficient training and academic support. AMCs wanting to facilitate the success of their PT faculty may need to expand the support available to them.

AB - Background: There is increased interest in part-time (PT) positions at academic medical centers (AMCs). Faculty and institutional leaders may have concerns about the potential for academic advancement among PT faculty. Our objective was to determine the impact of working PT on measures of academic productivity. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was mailed to PT and full-time (FT) physicians in U.S. divisions of general internal medicine. Outcome measures included publications and funding. We used multivariate analysis to identify factors associated with academic productivity. Results: The response rate was 63% (176 of 279); 91% of respondents were women (160 of 176). Compared with FT faculty, PT faculty were more often clinicians (Cs) or clinician-educators (CEs) (78% vs. 96%, p<0.001), were less likely to be fellowship trained (44% vs. 23%, p<0.001), and reported less academic support, including administrative assistance (84% vs. 67%, p=0.008), mentoring (71% vs. 54%, p=0.02), and research support (43% vs. 25%, p=0.01). PT faculty spent a greater percentage of their time in patient care (55% vs. 45%, p=0.01) and teaching (32% vs. 23%, p=0.01) and less time in research activities (5% vs. 15%, p=0.01) compared with FT faculty. Among Cs and CEs, FT faculty reported more publications (median 2, interquartile range [IQR 5] vs. median 0, IQR 1, p<0.001) and funding (odds ratio [OR] 2.85, 95% confidence internal [CI] 1.36-5.98). Multivariate analyses showed that fellowship training, mentors, academic support, and number of total years worked were associated with publications and acquisition of funding. There were no associations between working PT and publications or funding. Conclusions: PT faculty report fewer publications and grants. This may be related to insufficient training and academic support. AMCs wanting to facilitate the success of their PT faculty may need to expand the support available to them.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78149381837&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78149381837&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/jwh.2009.1890

DO - 10.1089/jwh.2009.1890

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 1995

EP - 2000

JO - Journal of Women's Health

JF - Journal of Women's Health

SN - 1540-9996

IS - 11

ER -