27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Mentorship in Radiation Oncology: Role of Gender Diversity in Abstract Presenting and Senior Author Dyads on Subsequent High-Impact Publications

      Advances in Radiation Oncology
      Elsevier

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          To generate insights regarding the role of gender in research mentorship, we analyzed characteristics of abstracts selected for oral and poster discussion presentations at the American Society for Radiation Oncology annual meeting and subsequent high-impact publications.

          Methods and Materials

          Clinical radiation oncology abstracts selected for oral and poster discussion presentations at the American Society for Radiation Oncology annual meetings in 2014 and 2015 were reviewed. A multivariable logistic regression model evaluated factors associated with subsequent higher-impact publications among abstracts that led to manuscript publications. The primary independent variable was the presenting–senior (last) author gender dyad (divided into 4 groups based on gender of presenting and senior authors, respectively; eg, “MF” indicates male presenting and female senior). Dyads were classified as MF, FM, MM, or FF.

          Results

          Data were derived from 390 oral and 142 poster discussions. Presenting and senior author pairings were MM for 286 (53.8%), FF for 67 (12.6%), MF for 84 (15.8%), and FM for 94 (17.7%) abstracts. Overall, 403 abstracts led to subsequent publications, of which 52.1% (210) were in a higher-impact journal. Eventual publication in a higher-impact journal was significantly associated with senior author H-index (odds ratio [OR] 3.30 for H ≥ 41 vs < 17; group P = .007), grant support for the study (OR 2.09 for funded vs not, P = .0261), and with the presenting and senior author gender pairing (group P = .0107). Specifically, FM pairings (OR 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-4.66) and MF pairings (OR 2.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-4.77) had higher odds of high-impact publication than MM pairings, whereas there was no significant difference in this outcome between FF and MM pairings.

          Conclusions

          Although unmeasured confounding remains possible, MF and FM dyads of presenting and senior authors were more likely than MM dyads to obtain journal publication in a higher-impact journal. Institutions and the profession should support the development and maintenance of respectful, collaborative cross-gender mentorship.

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mentoring and the career satisfaction of male and female academic medical faculty.

          To explore aspects of mentoring that might influence medical faculty career satisfaction and to discover whether there are gender differences.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Workforce Diversity: A Key to Improve Productivity

              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Contributors
              Journal
              Adv Radiat Oncol
              Adv Radiat Oncol
              Advances in Radiation Oncology
              Elsevier
              2452-1094
              31 October 2019
              Mar-Apr 2020
              31 October 2019
              : 5
              : 2
              : 292-296
              Affiliations
              [a ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
              [b ]Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, Mississippi
              [c ]Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
              [d ]Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
              [e ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
              [f ]Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
              [g ]Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
              Author notes
              []Corresponding author: Reshma Jagsi, MD, DPhil rjagsi@ 123456med.umich.edu
              Article
              S2452-1094(19)30161-7
              10.1016/j.adro.2019.10.005
              7136636
              32280830
              02896f94-f750-4af6-9102-8930907f5340
              © 2019 The Authors

              This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

              History
              : 29 May 2019
              : 7 October 2019
              : 11 October 2019
              Categories
              Research Letter

              Comments

              Comment on this article