Zavala Acsa M, Heir Jagtar Singh, Cata Juan P, Feng Lei, Soliz Jose M
Department of Anesthesiology & PeriOperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Adv Cancer Educ Qual Improv. 2025 Jun;1(1). doi: 10.52519/aceqi.25.1.1.a8.
The effect of anesthesiology fellowships on scholarly contributions has been minimally studied. In this study we analyzed differences in h-index between fellowship-trained and non-fellowship-trained anesthesiologists, as well as by type of fellowship, academic rank, and years in practice.
All anesthesiologists on staff between September 1, 2021, and August 31, 2022, were included in this study. The variables collected were fellowship training status, h-index, total number of publications, years in practice, academic rank, and years at the institution. For analysis, the anesthesiologists were divided into 2 groups: those with fellowship training and those without.
Among 78 anesthesiologists, 40 were not fellowship-trained and 38 were, with 10 types of anesthesiology fellowships identified. The h-index and number of publications did not differ between fellowship-trained and non-fellowship-trained anesthesiologists, and the number of publications per years in practice did not differ by fellowship type. The number of publications per years in practice was higher in the fellowship-trained group than in the non-fellowship-trained group (1.2 ± 1.1 vs. 0.71 ± 0.6; P = .04), as was the number of publications per years in practice at our institution (1.5 ± 1.1 compared with 0.9 ± 0.9; P = .0093).
Fellowship training among academic anesthesiologists was not associated with a difference in h-index. However, fellowship training was associated with a higher number of publications per years in practice. Further research could elucidate the usefulness of h-index to support career development and contributions of anesthesiologists in academia.
麻醉学 fellowship 对学术贡献的影响研究极少。在本研究中，我们分析了接受 fellowship 培训和未接受 fellowship 培训的麻醉医生之间 h 指数的差异，以及按 fellowship 类型、学术职称和从业年限的差异。
纳入 2021 年 9 月 1 日至 2022 年 8 月 31 日在职的所有麻醉医生。收集的变量包括 fellowship 培训状态、h 指数、发表文章总数、从业年限、学术职称以及在该机构的工作年限。为进行分析，将麻醉医生分为两组：接受 fellowship 培训的和未接受的。
在 78 名麻醉医生中，40 名未接受 fellowship 培训，38 名接受了，共确定了 10 种麻醉学 fellowship 类型。接受 fellowship 培训和未接受 fellowship 培训的麻醉医生之间的 h 指数和发表文章数量没有差异，且每年发表文章数量不因 fellowship 类型而异。接受 fellowship 培训组每年发表文章数量高于未接受 fellowship 培训组（1.2±1.1 对 0.71±0.6；P = 0.04），在我们机构每年发表文章数量也是如此（1.5±1.1 对比 0.9±0.9；P = 0.0093）。
学术麻醉医生的 fellowship 培训与 h 指数差异无关。然而，fellowship 培训与每年更高的发表文章数量相关。进一步研究可阐明 h 指数对支持麻醉医生在学术界的职业发展和贡献的有用性。
