Antimicrobial prophylaxis in veterinary surgery.

A. E. van den Bogaard,W. Weidema

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Impact of a Centralized Plastic Surgery Research Infrastructure on Scholarly Productivity and Output

Nikhil Sobti,Ben S Rhee,Luke Soliman,Vinay Rao,Daniel Kwan,Albert S Woo,Reena Bhatt,Loree Kalliainen,Karl Breuing,Paul Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000005595

2024-02-06

Abstract:Although research and innovation is a key within the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery, the impact of team structure, interpersonal dynamics, and/or standardized infrastructure on scholarly output has been infrequently studied. In this work, we present the formation and implementation of a novel plastic surgery research program that aims to unite previously disparate clinical and translational research efforts at our institution to facilitate critical inquiry. From July 2022 to June 2023, our department launched a pilot research program based on three pillars: (1) formalization of a research curriculum (monthly research meetings for agenda setting and discussion for project honing, formal research leadership for meeting facilitation and workflow regulation), (2) development of a centralized database to compile ongoing research (Google Drive repository to house all ongoing research documents, facilitate real-time editing, and provide resources/templates for assisting in the research process), and (3) bolstering of a core research identity built on mentorship and collaboration (more frequent interactions to shift previously siloed faculty-student mentorship into a robust milieu of intercollaboration). During the first year, we saw an increased number of publications and presentations, as well as robust participation and contribution from faculty, residents, and medical students. Future directions will focus on addressing resource limitation, such as project idea availability and funding, to sustain the success and growth of this novel research infrastructure.
Clinical Research Fellowship Fosters Mentorship, Teamwork, and Productivity: Our 11-Year Experience With a Craniofacial Research Fellowship

Dominic J. Romeo,Steven Du,Benjamin B. Massenburg,Jinggang J. Ng,Meagan Wu,Dillan F. Villavisanis,John P. Fischer,Jordan W. Swanson,Scott P. Bartlett,Jesse A. Taylor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000009978

2024-02-29

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

Abstract:Introduction: This study describes the development and explores the academic impact of a cleft and craniofacial research fellowship. Materials and Methods: Research and career outcomes from 3 cleft and craniofacial surgeons, 14 clinical fellows, and 25 research fellows between 2010 and 2023 were examined. Academic productivity was measured by the number of peer-reviewed publications indexed in PubMed and podium presentations at national/international meetings. Residency match statistics were recorded for eligible research fellows. Results: Over this 14-year period (11 with research fellows), the team produced 500 publications in 96 peer-reviewed journals, with 153 (31%) in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 117 (23%) in the Journal of Craniofacial Surgery , and 32 (6%) in The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. Yearly publications increased from 15.3±7.6 per year (before fellowship) to 23.0±5.3 (with 1 fellow) to 38.3±12.9 (2 fellows) to 81.0±5.7 (3 fellows; P <0.001). There was a strong annual linear growth in publications since the beginning the research fellowship position ( r =0.88, P <0.001). All (100%) clinical research fellows developed strong relationships with senior surgeons, and all who applied to plastic surgery residency matched a significantly higher success rate than the national average ( P <0.05). Conclusion: Implementing a structured cleft and craniofacial clinical research fellowship was associated with a broad impact across all cleft and craniofacial team members, as reflected by increased academic output and high match rates among fellows. The fellowship also strengthens the talent pipeline into plastic surgery by fostering meaningful mentor/mentee relationships and provides a model that can be adopted in both surgical and nonsurgical fields.

surgery
Increasing Neurosurgical Resident Research Productivity Through Cultural Shift: Choosing Carrots Over Sticks

Mustafa Motiwala,Erin Miller,Michael Herr,Ahmed Motiwala,Amro Amro,Vincent Nguyen,Andrew J Gienapp,Paul Klimo,L Madison Michael 2nd

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.69278

2024-09-12

Cureus

Abstract:Introduction As part of the Milestones Initiative of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), residents in neurosurgery are expected to participate in either clinical research or basic science research. Therefore, each neurosurgical training program must offer the support and opportunity to achieve this goal. In 2012, a structured effort to promote a resident culture of research was introduced into the authors' neurosurgery residency training curriculum. This study reviews this experience over the last decade. Methods Data were collected from the authors' departmental neurosurgery website and Scopus to create a database of neurosurgical residents who graduated 10 years before and after 2012 and their publication output. Bibliometric measures were collected for all articles published by residents. Results were compared between residents who graduated before and after the introduction of the research initiative. Results A total of 127 publications were analyzed from 37 residents, constituting 174 authorships. There was a statistically significant increase in the number of publications per resident (P < 0.001), citation number per author (P = 0.002), and author h-index (P < 0.001) after implementing the initiative. There were no significant differences in the pre-residency and baseline demographic variables between the two groups. Conclusion This study relates the experience of initiating a research culture at the authors' neurosurgery training program, which did not emphasize scholarly productivity historically. The effort focused on creating a culture of curiosity as opposed to formal requirements. The results provided evidence that this strategy yielded a significant increase in academic output and impact. These findings have important implications for neurosurgical training programs.
Research Productivity of Integrated Plastic Surgery Residents: Does Reputation Matter?

Claudia Siniakowicz,Parisorn Thepmankorn,Lauren Zingaro,Vaishali Ravikumar,Joshua B. Cadwell,Rose S. Maisner,Haripriya S. Ayyala

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2022.03.003

IF: 2.417

2022-08-01

Journal of Surgical Research

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: It is unknown whether the ranking of plastic surgery residency programs influences resident research output. This study aims to determine whether program reputation and other factors are associated with integrated plastic surgery resident academic productivity.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Programs were divided into four tiers based on Doximity reputation rankings. Residents from 2019 to 2020 were found through program websites and social media accounts. Works published during residency were identified through PubMed and Scopus from July 1 of each resident's intern year to August 10, 2020. Variables included resident demographics and medical school, residency reputation ranking, geographic region, and medical school affiliation. 'High research output' was defined as having ≥75th percentile of publications adjusted by training year.RESULTS: In total, 921 residents in 80 programs were identified. The median (IQR) number of total publications and original articles was 3 (1-6) and 2 (0-4), respectively. On multivariable analysis, residents in top-20 ranked programs (OR = 2.31, 95% CI [1.55; 3.43], P < 0.001) or from programs associated with top-20 medical schools (OR = 1.61, 95% CI [1.08; 2.41], P = 0.020) were more likely to have higher research output. On the other hand, coming from a top-50 in research medical school (OR = 1.80, 95% CI [1.31; 2.47], P < 0.001) or being in a program affiliated with a top-20 medical school (OR = 2.52, 95% CI [1.69; 3.78], P < 0.001) were associated with higher original article output. Gender and geographic location were not associated with higher research output.CONCLUSIONS: Program reputation and affiliated medical school research rankings are associated with research productivity during integrated plastic surgery residency. Applicants with a particular interest in research careers may consider this as they apply to residency.

surgery
[Demonstration of staphylococcal enterotoxins].

H. Fey,G. Stiffler-Rosenberg,G. Wartenweiler-Burkhard,C. Müller,O. Rüegg

1982-06-01

Schweizer Archiv für Tierheilkunde

Abstract:
Factors Impacting Academic Productivity and Satisfaction of Surgeon-scientists

Paula Marincola Smith,Amy Martinez,Rebecca Irlmeier,Carmen C. Solórzano,Deepa Magge,Fei Ye,James R. Goldenring

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000006254

IF: 13.787

2024-02-29

Annals of Surgery

Abstract:Objective: To identify factors related to research success for academic surgeons. Summary Background Data: Many recognize mounting barriers to scientific success for academic surgeons, but little is known about factors that predict success for individual surgeons. Methods: A phase 1 survey was emailed to department chairpersons at highly funded US departments of surgery. Participating chairpersons distributed a phase 2 survey to their faculty surgeons. Training- and faculty-stage exposures and demographic data were collected and compared with participant-reported measures of research productivity. Five primary measures of productivity were assessed including number of grants applied for, grants funded, papers published, first/senior author papers published, and satisfaction in research. Results: Twenty chairpersons and 464 faculty surgeons completed the survey, and 444 faculty responses were included in the final analysis. Having a research-focused degree was significantly associated with more grants applied for (PhD, incidence rate ratio (IRR)=6.93; masters, IRR=4.34) and funded (PhD, IRR=4.74; masters, IRR=4.01) compared to surgeons with only clinical degrees (all P <0.01). Having a formal research mentor was significantly associated with more grants applied for (IRR=1.57, P =0.03) and higher satisfaction in research (IRR=2.22, P <0.01). Contractually protected research time was significantly associated with more grants applied for (IRR=3.73), grants funded (IRR=2.14), papers published (IRR=2.12), first/senior authors published (IRR=1.72), and research satisfaction (Odds ratio=2.15) (all P <0.01). The primary surgeon-identified barrier to research productivity was lack of protection from clinical burden. Conclusions: Surgeons pursuing research-focused careers should consider the benefits of attaining a research-focused degree, negotiating for contractually protected research time, and obtaining formal research mentorship.

surgery
[H-subunit lactic acid dehydrogenase deficiency].

M. Kitamura

1973-08-10

Abstract:
Trends in Residency Academic Productivity of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellows Between 2012 and 2019

Austin Huang,R Parker Kirby,Kevin Y Huang,Tony Du,Andrew Mu,Samuel Wu,Celine Nguyen,Rachel Dang,Stephen P Yoon,Michael T Yen,Zaina Al-Mohtaseb

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000002322

Abstract:Purpose: To characterize research productivity of ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery (OPRS) fellows during residency. Methods: A database was compiled of OPRS fellows listed on the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS) Annual Fall Scientific Symposium program books who began their fellowship between 2012 and 2019. PubMed was searched for all publications published between July 1st of the year they began residency and September 30th of the year they began fellowship training. Bibliometric variables captured for each fellow included: the number of publications, first-author publications, and ophthalmology-related publications. Results: A total of 197 OPRS fellows who began their fellowship training between 2012 and 2019 published a mean (± SD) of 2.42 ± 2.80 publications, 1.43 ± 1.85 first-author publications, and 2.33 ± 2.74 ophthalmology-related publications during residency. Linear regression revealed that the number of publications ( P < 0.001), first-author publications ( P < 0.001), and ophthalmology-related publications ( P < 0.001) that OPRS fellows published during residency have all significantly increased over the time assessed. Conclusions: The academic productivity of OPRS fellows during residency was quantified through bibliometric analysis to establish a national benchmark for the benefit of both prospective applicants and program directors. Residency research output of OPRS fellows has significantly increased between 2012 and 2019. Since ASOPRS program requirements necessitate academic productivity and thesis completion, publication records and involvement in research become valuable considerations when evaluating fellowship applicants. The knowledge of what accepted fellows have published provides the opportunity to make historical comparisons and may prove useful in the evaluation of the competitiveness of a given year's applicant pool.
Medical Leadership: Experiences in the Use of Shared and Parental Leadership to Improve Academic Performance in the Management of a National Plastic Surgery Unit in China

Jie Li,Sally Kiu-Huen Ng,Yuanjin Xu,Qingfeng Li,Li Wang,Yixin Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008370

2021-10-01

Abstract:Background: Effective leadership is an integral component for optimal academic performance of surgical units. As one of the leading plastic surgery academic medical centers in China, the authors would like to share their experiences of using the combined parental and shared leadership approach in managing their surgical staff within the department. It has taken into account the essence of Eastern moral philosophies and Western leadership theories. Methods: The authors performed a review of the academic development of their staff and changes in the academic productivity of the department between 1999 and 2018. The difference between the first 10 years (1999 to 2008) and second 10 years (2009 to 2018) was analyzed to assess the effectiveness of the authors' leadership approach. Results: There is an increase in the number of Science Citation Index articles published in the past decade with a higher impact factor and more articles published in international journals. The timing to promotion was on average 8.4 years. The average age of promotion to consultants has increased, likely because of a later start in the training. With similar average age, prior education, and gender ratio of surgeons in the unit, the department also received 14 times more in research funding and four times more in national key topic research topic. Conclusions: The effective application of this combined leadership approach has significantly improved the academic productivity and quality of the authors' residents and surgeons and the academic advancement of the unit.
"Patent Productivity among Academic Plastic Surgeons in the United States over 20 Years"

Alexander F Dagi,Nikhil A Gangoli,Michael B Amrami,Myles N LaValley,Christine H Rohde,Jarrod T Bogue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2024.11.021

IF: 3.022

2024-11-29

Journal of Plastic Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery

Abstract:Background Innovation is a cornerstone of plastic and reconstructive surgery. Patents are one way to measure innovation. The objective of this study was to quantify and understand patent productivity in the career of academic plastic surgeons. Methods Faculty affiliated with United States academic medical centers with integrated plastic surgery residencies were searched by name on Google Patents from inception through April 2024. Included patents were active or pending and related to a fundamental clinical or basic science area of plastic surgery. Results Among 977 academic plastic surgeons across 89 programs, there were 191 active or pending patents published by 68 (7.0%) surgeons. The average number of patents per inventor was 2.8 (4.3). The highest number of active or pending patents attributed to a surgeon-inventor was 25. Nearly 50% (n=91) of patents were held by four universities. Time since initial board certification correlated poorly with the number of patents produced (R 2 = 0.17, P > 0.1). Being at a program with more affiliated patents correlated with the presence of more patent-producers ( r s = 0.66; P <0.001). There was no indication that higher percent revenue distribution to an inventor increased patent productivity ( r s = 0.002; P > 0.05). Conclusions Plastic surgery remains a field driving innovation. Plastic surgeons at all career stages hold patents, highlighting the possibility for early patent pursuit. Patent-productivity was concentrated in several programs in the US, suggesting certain centers of innovations exist and may be worthy of further study.

surgery
Conversion Rate of Abstracts Presented at Plastic Surgery The Meeting From 2010 to 2019

Neel Vishwanath,Olivia W. Cummings,Justin Lim,Shreyas Kulkarni,Nikhil Sobti,Daniel O'Toole,Reena Bhatt,Loree K. Kalliainen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/sap.0000000000003792

2024-04-01

Annals of Plastic Surgery

Abstract:Background Presentations are an important means of knowledge generation. Publication of these studies is important for dissemination of findings beyond meeting attendees. We analyzed a 10-year sample of presented abstracts at Plastic Surgery The Meeting and describe factors that improve rate and speed of conversion to peer-reviewed publication. Methods Abstracts presented between 2010 and 2019 at Plastic Surgery The Meeting were sourced from the American Society of Plastic Surgery Abstract Archive. A random sample of 100 abstracts from each year was evaluated. Abstract information and demographics were recorded. The title or author and keywords of each abstract were searched using a standardized workflow to find a corresponding published paper on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Google. Data were analyzed for trends and factors affecting conversion rate. Results A total of 983 presented abstracts were included. The conversion rate was 54.1%. Residents and fellows constituted the largest proportion of presenters (38.4%). There was a significant increase in medical student and research fellow presenters during the study period ( P < 0.001). Conversion rate was not affected by the research rank of a presenter's affiliated institution ( β = 1.001, P = 0.89), geographic location ( P = 0.60), or subspecialty tract ( P = 0.73). US academics had a higher conversion rate (61.8%) than US nonacademics (32.7%) or international presenters (47.1%) ( P < 0.001). Medical students had the highest conversion rate (65.6%); attendings had the lowest (45.0%). Research fellows had the lowest average time to publication (11.6 months, P = 0.007). Conclusions Lower levels of training, factors associated with increased institution-level support, and research quality affect rate and time to publication. These findings highlight the success of current models featuring medical student and research fellow-led projects with strong resident and faculty mentorship.

surgery
A SWOT Analysis of Hot Topics in Plastic Surgery Resident Education: Consensus From the ACAPS 10th Annual Winter Meeting

Meera Reghunathan,Justin M. Camacho,Jessica Blum,Gabriela Sendek,Thanh T. Luong,Shirley Chen,Perry Bradford,Jason Llaneras,Paris D. Butler,Amanda A. Gosman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/gox.0000000000005461

2024-01-06

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open

Abstract:Background: With the aim of facilitating a critical self-reflection on how to align plastic surgery education with making excellent plastic surgeons, a rotating small-group session followed by live interactive audience polling was used to perform a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis at the 10th Annual American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons Winter Meeting. Methods: The final day of the conference included a 3-hour session of rotating small groups followed by live interactive audience polls discussing the following six relevant educational topics: the Plastic Surgery Common Application and resident selection, aesthetic surgery education, leadership development and business education, embedded fellowships and focused training, mentorship, and faculty retention. Results: A total of 60 individuals participated in the activity. A SWOT analysis was successfully performed for each educational topic, and a minimum of four opportunities were identified per topic to help guide future endeavors. Examples of opportunities include releasing recommendations for the implementation of holistic review; developing formal guidelines for aesthetic surgery education in residency via collaboration between ACAPS, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and The Aesthetic Society; creating extended focused elective rotations; integrating business education into formal curricula for all training levels; enforcing transparency regarding position expectations and offerings including salary, call schedule, and current challenges; and more. Conclusion: The results of this study will help guide future initiatives by the ACAPS to improve resident education and academic retention.
Integrated Plastic Surgery Match: Trends in Research Productivity of Successful Candidates

Ledibabari M Ngaage,Adekunle Elegbede,Katie L McGlone,Brooks J Knighton,Carisa M Cooney,Damon S Cooney,Scott D Lifchez,Sheri Slezak,Yvonne M Rasko,Ledibabari M. Ngaage,Katie L. McGlone,Brooks J. Knighton,Carisa M. Cooney,Damon S. Cooney,Scott D. Lifchez,Yvonne M. Rasko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000006928

2020-04-22

Abstract:Plastic surgery continues to be one of the most competitive specialties in the residency match. Research productivity is a key component of the selection process. Nevertheless, potential applicants have a poor understanding of the strength of their research credentials in comparison to other applicants.

surgery
Changing the Culture: Increasing and Sustaining Anesthesiology Resident Physician Publication Rates

William C Culp Jr,Riley J Hedin,Daniel W Watkins,Craig J Lilie,J Clint Tippett,Emily H Garmon,Timothy M Bittenbinder,Russell K McAllister

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxvi_issue1_culp

2024-03-20

Abstract:Background: Academic inquiry is foundational to the advancement of medicine and resident training and must be demonstrated to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Past attempts at increasing publication rates have failed to identify educational best practice models. Our aim was to increase resident publication rates via culture and value changes that are universally implementable, affordable, effective, and sustainable. Methods: In 2018, a multifaceted initiative was implemented to shift departmental values and foster a culture of academic productivity. This culture change stressed the value of scientific publication through frequent, consistent messaging from department leaders. In addition, residents were provided the freedom to choose their scholarly activities. In this retrospective cohort innovation, resident authors were identified for 4 academic years before and after the intervention and publication rates were determined (2014-2018 vs 2018-2022). Resident authors and publications per resident per year were compared using descriptive statistics and Student t test. Results: The pre- and postintervention groups included 38 and 37 residents, respectively. Resident-authored publications increased from 7 preintervention to 24 postintervention, representing 343% of baseline. Mean ± SD publications per resident per year similarly increased 357% from 0.183 ± 0.16 to 0.654 ± 0.11 postintervention. Unpaired t test analysis demonstrated a significant difference in total publications per year (P = .002) and authorship rate (P = .003). Conclusions: A multifaceted academic initiative resulted in a threefold increase in resident publication rates. This initiative demonstrates that local advocacy by leaders, freedom of choice for authors, and supportive departmental culture are driving factors in publication rates.
Transforming the Future of Surgeon-Scientists

Daniela P Ladner,Allan M Goldstein,Timothy R Billiar,Andrew M Cameron,Darren R Carpizo,Daniel I Chu,Craig M Coopersmith,Ronald P DeMatteo,Sandy Feng,Katherine A Gallagher,William E Gillanders,Brajesh K Lal,Gerald S Lipshutz,Annie Liu,Ronald V Maier,Elizabeth A Mittendorf,Arden M Morris,Jason K Sicklick,Omaida C Velazquez,Bryan A Whitson,Lee G Wilke,Sam S Yoon,Martha A Zeiger,Diana L Farmer,E Shelley Hwang,ASA Task Force for Research Sustainability

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006148

2024-02-01

Abstract:Objective: To create a blueprint for surgical department leaders, academic institutions, and funding agencies to optimally support surgeon-scientists. Background: Scientific contributions by surgeons have been transformative across many medical disciplines. Surgeon-scientists provide a distinct approach and mindset toward key scientific questions. However, lack of institutional support, pressure for increased clinical productivity, and growing administrative burden are major challenges for the surgeon-scientist, as is the time-consuming nature of surgical training and practice. Methods: An American Surgical Association Research Sustainability Task Force was created to outline a blueprint for sustainable science in surgery. Leaders from top NIH-sponsored departments of surgery engaged in video and in-person meetings between January and April 2023. A strength, weakness, opportunities, threats analysis was performed, and workgroups focused on the roles of surgeons, the department and institutions, and funding agencies. Results: Taskforce recommendations: (1) SURGEONS: Growth mindset : identifying research focus, long-term planning, patience/tenacity, team science, collaborations with disparate experts; Skill set : align skills and research, fill critical skill gaps, develop team leadership skills; DEPARTMENT OF SURGERY (DOS): (2) MENTORSHIP: Chair : mentor-mentee matching/regular meetings/accountability, review of junior faculty progress, mentorship training requirement, recognition of mentorship (eg, relative value unit equivalent, awards; Mentor: dedicated time, relevant scientific expertise, extramural funding, experience and/or trained as mentor, trusted advisor; Mentee : enthusiastic/eager, proactive, open to feedback, clear about goals; (3) FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY: diversification of research portfolio, identification of matching funding sources, departmental resource awards (eg, T-/P-grants), leveraging of institutional resources, negotiation of formalized/formulaic funds flow investment from academic medical center toward science, philanthropy; (4) STRUCTURAL/STRATEGIC SUPPORT: Structural: grants administrative support, biostats/bioinformatics support, clinical trial and research support, regulatory support, shared departmental laboratory space/equipment; Strategic: hiring diverse surgeon-scientist/scientists faculty across DOS, strategic faculty retention/ recruitment, philanthropy, career development support, progress tracking, grant writing support, DOS-wide research meetings, regular DOS strategic research planning; (5) COMMUNITY AND CULTURE: Community: right mix of faculty, connection surgeon with broad scientific community; Culture: building research infrastructure, financial support for research, projecting importance of research (awards, grand rounds, shoutouts); (6) THE ROLE OF INSTITUTIONS: Foundation: research space co-location, flexible start-up packages, courses/mock study section, awards, diverse institutional mentorship teams; Nurture: institutional infrastructure, funding (eg, endowed chairs), promotion friendly toward surgeon-scientists, surgeon-scientists in institutional leadership positions; Expectations: RVU target relief, salary gap funding, competitive starting salaries, longitudinal salary strategy; (7) THE ROLE OF FUNDING AGENCIES: change surgeon research training paradigm, offer alternate awards to K-awards, increasing salary cap to reflect market reality, time extension for surgeon early-stage investigator status, surgeon representation on study section, focused award strategies for professional societies/foundations. Conclusions: Authentic recommitment from surgeon leaders with intentional and ambitious actions from institutions, corporations, funders, and society is essential in order to reap the essential benefits of surgeon-scientists toward advancements of science.
Benign Fibrous Histiocytoma of Maxillary Gingiva

A. George,M. Pynadath,C. S. Jayapalan,Ahammed Noufal,Manjunath Ga,Nair Rb

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-1122.1000227

2014-03-28

Abstract:Background: Fibrohistiocytic lesions are heterogeneous group of mesenchymal tumours that are chiefly composed of fibroblastic and histiocytic elements. They occur commonly in the cutaneous soft tissue of the lower extremities and rarely in the non-cutaneous soft tissues of the head and neck. Case Description: A 37yr old female reported with progressive difficulty in mouth opening. Intraoral examination revealed a large well-defined gingival swelling on the right maxillary tuberosity. The lesion had normal mucosal colouration, granular surface, was non-ulcerated, firm on palpation, and was not associated with tenderness or discharge. Clinical Implication: Benign fibrous histiocytoma (BFH) are uncommon in the oral cavity but should be considered in the differential diagnosis of fibrous growth of gingiva and oral mucosa. Diagnosis of non-cutaneous BFH is difficult because of its non-specific clinical appearance, uncertain histogenesis, microscopic similarities, and lack of any specific immunohistochemical (IHC) marker. To the best of our knowledge this article describes the first case of BFH involving the maxillary posterior buccal gingiva. We also discuss the pathological and IHC characteristics of the lesion.
Linkage of blepharophimosis syndrome in a large Indian pedigree to chromosome 7p.

M. Maw,B. Kar,J. Biswas,P. Biswas,D. Nancarrow,R. Bridges,GOVINDASAMY KUMARAMANICKAVEL,M. Denton,S. Badrinath

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/HMG/5.12.2049

IF: 5.1214

1996-12-01

Human Molecular Genetics

Abstract:Blepharophimosis syndrome (BPES) is an autosomal dominant disorder involving abnormal eyelid development. Cytogenetic and linkage analyses have previously implicated the chromosome 3q23 region in multiple cases of this syndrome. However, in a few cases cytogenetic analyses have implicated other chromosomal regions in this condition. Here we report linkage of BPES in a large Indian pedigree to chromosome 7p13-p21; affected only two-point and multipoint analyses using D7S488, D7S2551 and D7S2562 both showed peak lod scores of 3.61 coincident with D7S2562. Recombinations in affected individuals placed the critical region between D7S488 and D7S629. When both affected and unaffected individuals were considered, a maximum two-point lod score of 3.38 at theta = 0.08 was obtained with D7S2551 while a peak multipoint lod score of 3.64 was obtained between D7S488 and D7S2551. Segregation analysis revealed two unaffected individuals carrying the affected haplotype accounted for the difference in peak, relative to the affected only analysis. The chromosome 7p candidate genes inhibin beta A and epidermal growth factor receptor map outside this region whereas the HOX1 gene cluster may map inside this region. Although BPES is sometimes associated with female infertility due to premature ovarian failure, in the current family affected females were fertile. The current finding together with the previous evidence implicating chromosome 3q2 provides strong evidence that BPES involves locus heterogeneity; this point should be considered when counselling affected families.
The Impact of PhD Degrees in Academic Plastic Surgery: An In-depth Analysis of Faculty and Residents

Rami Elmorsi,Malke Asaad,Krishna Vyas,Omar Badawi,Mark W Clemen,Carrie K Chu,Jesse Selber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-024-04059-1

2024-09-01

Abstract:Background: Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) is the highest academic degree awarded by universities in most fields of study. In surgery, it is thought to provide surgeons with skills to conduct high-quality research and advance academically. However, this presumed effect has not been assessed among academic plastic surgeons (APSs) and plastic surgery residents (PSRs). The purpose of this study is to determine the differences in multiple strata of career progression and success between PhD and non-PhD graduates in academic plastic surgery. Methods: We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional study of APSs and PSRs. Departmental websites of integrated plastic surgery residency programs were used to identify our study population and their demographics, degrees, and tenure status. Data on research productivity were collected using Scopus. Information on research funding was gathered through the National Institutes of Health and Plastic Surgery Foundation. To assess the plastic surgery programs' reputations, we divided residency programs into four quartiles (Q1, 1-20; Q2, 21-40; Q3, 41-60; Q4, 61+) according to their Doximity ranking. Results: We identified 841 APSs (78.5% men) and 948 PSRs (58.1% men), of whom 5.1% and 2.7% had a PhD degree, respectively. PhD graduates had significantly more advanced research portfolios. PhD APSs were more likely to secure research funding, and PhD PSRs were more likely to train at highly reputed programs. However, academic rank and leadership appointments were not significantly influenced by PhDs. Conclusion: Holding a PhD can strongly advance a plastic surgeon's research portfolio, but it does not guarantee a better position or tenure status. Level of evidence iii: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
[Genetic manipulation research at Department of Molecular Biology University of Edinburgh (author's transl)].

N. Otsuji

1977-05-01

Abstract:
A Call to Action: A Specialty-Specific Course to Support the Next Generation of Clinician Scientists in Anesthesiology

Laura F Cavallone,Elizabeth W Duggan,Jeffrey S Berger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiv_issue3_cavallone

2022-07-01

Abstract:Clinical production pressure is a significant problem for faculty of anesthesiology departments who seek to remain involved in research. Lack of protected time to dedicate to research and insufficient external funding add to this long-standing issue. Recent trends in funding to the departments of anesthesiology and their academic output validate these concerns. A 2022 study examining National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant recipients associated with anesthesiology departments across 10 years (2011-2020) outlines total awarded funds at $1,676,482,440, with most of the funds awarded to only 10 departments in the United States. Of note, the total 1-year NIH funding in 2021 for academic internal medicine departments was 3 times higher than the 10-year funding of anesthesiology departments. Additionally, American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) diplomats represent a minority (37%) of the anesthesiology researchers obtaining grant funding, with a small number of faculty members receiving a prevalence of monies. Overall, the number of publications per academic anesthesiologist across the United States remains modest as does the impact of the scholarly work. Improving environments in which academic anesthesiologists thrive may be paramount to successful academic productivity. In fact, adding to the lack of academic time is the limited bandwidth of senior academic physicians to mentor and support aspiring physician scientists. Given then the challenges for individual departments and notable successes of specialty-specific collaborative efforts (eg Foundation for Anesthesia Education and Research [FAER]), additional pooled-resource approaches may be necessary to successfully support and develop clinician scientists. It is in this spirit that the leadership of Anesthesia and Analgesia and the Journal of Education in Perioperative Medicine, unified with the Association of University Anesthesiologists, aim to sponsor the Introduction to Clinical Research for Academic Anesthesiologists (ICRAA) Course. Directed toward early career academic anesthesiologists who wish to gain competency specifically in the fundamentals of clinical research and receive mentorship to develop an investigative project, the yearlong course will provide participants with the skills necessary to design research initiatives, ethically direct research teams, successfully communicate ideas with data analysts, and write and submit scientific articles. Additionally, the course, articulated in a series of interactive lectures, mentored activities, and workshops, will teach participants to review articles submitted for publication to medical journals and to critically appraise evidence in published research. It is our hope that this initiative will be of interest to junior faculty of academic anesthesiology departments nationally and internationally.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in veterinary surgery.

The Impact of a Centralized Plastic Surgery Research Infrastructure on Scholarly Productivity and Output

Clinical Research Fellowship Fosters Mentorship, Teamwork, and Productivity: Our 11-Year Experience With a Craniofacial Research Fellowship

Increasing Neurosurgical Resident Research Productivity Through Cultural Shift: Choosing Carrots Over Sticks

Research Productivity of Integrated Plastic Surgery Residents: Does Reputation Matter?

[Demonstration of staphylococcal enterotoxins].

Factors Impacting Academic Productivity and Satisfaction of Surgeon-scientists

[H-subunit lactic acid dehydrogenase deficiency].

Trends in Residency Academic Productivity of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Fellows Between 2012 and 2019

Medical Leadership: Experiences in the Use of Shared and Parental Leadership to Improve Academic Performance in the Management of a National Plastic Surgery Unit in China

"Patent Productivity among Academic Plastic Surgeons in the United States over 20 Years"

Conversion Rate of Abstracts Presented at Plastic Surgery The Meeting From 2010 to 2019

A SWOT Analysis of Hot Topics in Plastic Surgery Resident Education: Consensus From the ACAPS 10th Annual Winter Meeting

Integrated Plastic Surgery Match: Trends in Research Productivity of Successful Candidates

Changing the Culture: Increasing and Sustaining Anesthesiology Resident Physician Publication Rates

Transforming the Future of Surgeon-Scientists

Benign Fibrous Histiocytoma of Maxillary Gingiva

Linkage of blepharophimosis syndrome in a large Indian pedigree to chromosome 7p.

The Impact of PhD Degrees in Academic Plastic Surgery: An In-depth Analysis of Faculty and Residents

[Genetic manipulation research at Department of Molecular Biology University of Edinburgh (author's transl)].

A Call to Action: A Specialty-Specific Course to Support the Next Generation of Clinician Scientists in Anesthesiology