9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Career Satisfaction and Perceived Salary Competitiveness among Individuals Who Completed Postdoctoral Research Training in Cancer Prevention

      research-article
      1 , * , 2 , 2
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Studies examining career satisfaction of biomedical scientists are limited, especially in the context of prior postdoctoral training. Here we focused on career satisfaction defined as satisfaction with one’s career trajectory and perceived salary competitiveness among a predominantly Ph.D.-trained population of scientists who completed cancer prevention-related postdoctoral training between 1987–2011. National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program (CPFP) alumni (n = 114), and previous recipients of NCI-sponsored Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA/F32) postdoctoral fellowships (n = 140) completed online surveys. Associations of career satisfaction and perception of salary competitiveness with demographic, training, and employment-related factors were examined using logistic regression. Overall, 61% reported high levels of satisfaction with their career trajectory to-date. Higher salary (odds ratio [OR] = 2.86, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.07–7.69) and having more leadership roles (OR = 2.26, 95% CI:1.04–4.90) were independently associated with higher career satisfaction. Persons with race/ethnicity other than white (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.20–0.82) or age ≥ 50 (OR = 0.40, 95%CI: 0.17–0.94) had lower career satisfaction levels. There were no statistically significant differences in career satisfaction levels by gender, scientific discipline, or employment sector. 74% perceived their current salary as competitive, but persons with 5–9, or ≥10 years in their current position reported lower levels (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15–0.65; and OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16–0.87, respectively), as did individuals in government positions (OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.11–0.98). These data add to the understanding of career satisfaction of those with advanced training in biomedical research by examining these measures in relation to prior postdoctoral research training and across multiple career sectors.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

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

          Improving Graduate Education to Support a Branching Career Pipeline: Recommendations Based on a Survey of Doctoral Students in the Basic Biomedical Sciences

          Today's doctoral programs continue to prepare students for a traditional academic career path despite the inadequate supply of research-focused faculty positions. We advocate for a broader doctoral curriculum that prepares trainees for a wide range of science-related career paths. In support of this argument, we describe data from our survey of doctoral students in the basic biomedical sciences at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). Midway through graduate training, UCSF students are already considering a broad range of career options, with one-third intending to pursue a non–research career path. To better support this branching career pipeline, we recommend that national standards for training and mentoring include emphasis on career planning and professional skills development to ensure the success of PhD-level scientists as they contribute to a broadly defined global scientific enterprise.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Biomedical Science Ph.D. Career Interest Patterns by Race/Ethnicity and Gender

            Increasing biomedical workforce diversity remains a persistent challenge. Recent reports have shown that biomedical sciences (BMS) graduate students become less interested in faculty careers as training progresses; however, it is unclear whether or how the career preferences of women and underrepresented minority (URM) scientists change in manners distinct from their better-represented peers. We report results from a survey of 1500 recent American BMS Ph.D. graduates (including 276 URMs) that examined career preferences over the course of their graduate training experiences. On average, scientists from all social backgrounds showed significantly decreased interest in faculty careers at research universities, and significantly increased interest in non-research careers at Ph.D. completion relative to entry. However, group differences emerged in overall levels of interest (at Ph.D. entry and completion), and the magnitude of change in interest in these careers. Multiple logistic regression showed that when controlling for career pathway interest at Ph.D. entry, first-author publication rate, faculty support, research self-efficacy, and graduate training experiences, differences in career pathway interest between social identity groups persisted. All groups were less likely than men from well-represented (WR) racial/ethnic backgrounds to report high interest in faculty careers at research-intensive universities (URM men: OR 0.60, 95% CI: 0.36–0.98, p = 0.04; WR women: OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47–0.89, p = 0.008; URM women: OR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.30–0.71, p<0.001), and URM women were more likely than all other groups to report high interest in non-research careers (OR: 1.93, 95% CI: 1.28–2.90, p = 0.002). The persistence of disparities in the career interests of Ph.D. recipients suggests that a supply-side (or “pipeline”) framing of biomedical workforce diversity challenges may limit the effectiveness of efforts to attract and retain the best and most diverse workforce. We propose incorporation of an ecological perspective of career development when considering strategies to enhance the biomedical workforce and professoriate through diversity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predictors of physician career satisfaction, work-life balance, and burnout.

              To explore factors associated with physician career satisfaction, work-life balance, and burnout focusing on differences across age, gender, and specialty. A cross-sectional, mailed, self-administered survey was sent to a national sample of 2,000 randomly-selected physicians, stratified by specialty, age, and gender (response rate 48%). Main outcome measures included career satisfaction, burnout, and work-life balance. Scales ranged from 1 to 100. Both women and men report being highly satisfied with their careers (79% compared with 76%, P<.01), having moderate levels of satisfaction with work-life balance (48% compared with 49%, P=.24), and having moderate levels of emotional resilience (51% compared with 53%, P=.09). Measures of burnout strongly predicted career satisfaction (standardized beta 0.36-0.60, P<.001). The strongest predictor of work-life balance and burnout was having some control over schedule and hours worked (standardized beta 0.28, P<.001, and 0.20-0.32, P<.001, respectively). Physician gender, age, and specialty were not strong independent predictors of career satisfaction, work-life balance, or burnout. This national physician survey suggests that physicians can struggle with work-life balance yet remain highly satisfied with their career. Burnout is an important predictor of career satisfaction, and control over schedule and work hours are the most important predictors of work-life balance and burnout. II.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                25 January 2017
                2017
                : 12
                : 1
                : e0169859
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America
                [2 ]Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America
                University of California Irvine, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                • Conceptualization: JMFB DN.

                • Data curation: GI DN.

                • Formal analysis: GI.

                • Funding acquisition: JMFB.

                • Investigation: JMFB DN.

                • Methodology: JMFB DN.

                • Project administration: JMFB.

                • Resources: JMFB DN.

                • Supervision: JMFB DN.

                • Validation: GI.

                • Visualization: JMFB DN GI.

                • Writing – original draft: JMFB DN.

                • Writing – review & editing: JMFB DN.

                Article
                PONE-D-16-38401
                10.1371/journal.pone.0169859
                5266270
                28121985
                5ade0276-f2a1-472d-906c-e1d29efaf064

                This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

                History
                : 25 September 2016
                : 22 December 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 4, Pages: 13
                Funding
                Funded by: NIH Evaluation Set-Aside Program
                Award Recipient :
                Authors do not have additional grant funding. This work was funded by the NIH Evaluation Set-Aside program. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Social Sciences
                Economics
                Labor Economics
                Employment
                Careers
                Social Sciences
                Economics
                Labor Economics
                Salaries
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Professions
                Scientists
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Oncology
                Cancer Prevention
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Educational Status
                Graduates
                Alumni
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Surveys
                Social Sciences
                Economics
                Labor Economics
                Employment
                Science Policy
                Science and Technology Workforce
                Careers in Research
                Custom metadata
                The dataset used to create the tables in the manuscript has been uploaded to Open Science Framework. The public link is https://osf.io/9rxkm/.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article