Winners and Losers in Academic Productivity During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Is the Gender Gap Widening for Faculty?

Oral health educators' reflections on teaching 2022 and beyond

INTRODUCTION

The global pandemic prompted changes in health science education affecting both teaching and learning. This multi-institutional study assesses the near-term implications of these changes on faculty and faculty development. The project goals were to: (1) describe faculty experiences of teaching during the pandemic; (2) identify ways to sustain new pedagogical approaches, (3) describe the types of support faculty members need, and (4) offer recommendations to enhance oral health professions education.

METHODS

A mixed-method approach using exploratory sequential design was conducted in two phases collecting qualitative and quantitative data. Focus group participants included didactic, pre-clinical, and clinical faculty in dental school (DMD/DDS), dental hygiene and dental therapy programs, and also faculty members serving in administrative roles in these programs (N = 37). One hundred forty-four faculty participated in the multi-institutional follow-up survey.

RESULTS

Focus group and survey results led to 14 recommendations (nine structural and five individual) for oral health profession institutions and educators.

CONCLUSION

Oral health profession education faculty were dramatically impacted by the pandemic and new faculty development needs were identified. Traditional faculty development topics and practices may be no longer applicable in the post-COVID-19 environment. Additionally, the pandemic stimulated creative approaches for curriculum design, teaching, and assessment in oral health profession education. Strategies need to be implemented to sustain these innovations.

Evaluation of Culture Conducive to Academic Success by Gender at a Comprehensive Cancer Center

INTRODUCTION

The primary objective of this study was to determine whether workplace culture in academic oncology differed by gender, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the Culture Conducive to Women's Academic Success (CCWAS), a validated survey tool, to investigate the academic climate at an NCI-designated Cancer Center. We adapted the CCWAS to be applicable to people of all genders. The full membership of the Cancer Center was surveyed (total faculty = 429). The questions in each of 4 CCWAS domains (equal access to opportunities, work-life balance, freedom from gender bias, and leadership support) were scored using a 5-point Likert scale. Median score and interquartile ranges for each domain were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 168 respondents (men = 58, women = 106, n = 4 not disclosed) submitted survey responses. The response rate was 39% overall and 70% among women faculty. We found significant differences in perceptions of workplace culture by gender, both in responses to individual questions and in the overall score in the following domains: equal access to opportunities, work-life balance, and leader support, and in the total score for the CCWAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our survey is the first of its kind completed during the COVID-19 pandemic at an NCI-designated Cancer Center, in which myriad factors contributed to burnout and workplace challenges. These results point to specific issues that detract from the success of women pursuing careers in academic oncology. Identifying these issues can be used to design and implement solutions to improve workforce culture, mitigate gender bias, and retain faculty.

Physician Work-Personal Intersection: A Scoping Review of Terms, Definitions, and Measures

PURPOSE

A substantial body of evidence describes the multidimensional relationship between the intersection of physicians' work and personal lives and health care quality and costs, workforce sustainability, and workplace safety culture. However, there is no clear consensus on the terms, definitions, or measures used in physician work-personal intersection (WPI) research. In this scoping review, the authors aimed to describe the terms and definitions used by researchers to describe physician WPI, summarize the measurement tools used, and formulate a conceptual model of WPI that can inform future research.

METHOD

The authors searched PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies that investigated U.S. practicing physicians' WPI and measured WPI as an outcome from January 1990 to March 2022. The authors applied thematic analysis to all WPI terms, definitions, and survey questions or prompts in the included studies to create a conceptual model of physician WPI.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 102 studies were included in the final analysis. The most commonly used WPI terms were work-life balance, work-life integration, and work-home or work-life conflict(s). There was no consistency in the definition of any terms across studies. There was heterogeneity in the way WPI was measured, and only 8 (7.8%) studies used a validated measurement tool. The authors identified 6 key driver domains of WPI: work and personal demands; colleague and institutional support and resources; personal identity, roles, health, and values; work schedule and flexibility; partner and family support; and personal and professional strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors found significant variability in the terms, definitions, and measures used to study physician WPI. They offer a conceptual model of the WPI construct that can be used to more consistently study physician WPI in the future. Future work should further investigate the validity of this model and generate consensus around WPI terms, definitions, and measures.

Work-Life Balance and Academic Productivity Among College of Medicine Faculty During the Evolution of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The New Normal

Background

Work and home stress, productivity, and self-care of academic medicine faculty in Spring 2021 was contrasted to faculty's experience in the Spring of 2020, both of which were relatively compared with the prepandemic period.

Methods

A 93-question survey was sent to academic medicine faculty at an urban public university medical center in March 2020 and again in March 2021. Demographic, family, and academic characteristics, work distribution and productivity before and during the pandemic, perceived stress related to work and home activities, and self-care data compared with the prepandemic period were collected. Differences were assessed using chi-square or Fisher exact tests. Student t-test was used for the difference in mean values, while logistic regression was used to determine predictors of work stress.

Results

Two hundred thirty-one faculty completed the survey in Spring 2020 and 118 faculty responded in Spring 2021. The proportion of faculty reporting increased work and home stress decreased in Spring 2021 compared with Spring 2020. A higher proportion of women compared with men reported increased work stress in both surveys. In Spring 2021, work stress decreased significantly for men but not for women. Home stress decreased significantly for women in Spring 2021 but remained stable for the men faculty. Research productivity increased for both genders in Spring 2021, but a greater percentage of women reported disturbed sleep and diet. There were no differences in home stress levels between genders when caring for young children.

Conclusions

Men faculty are more likely to adapt to the "new normal" by lowering work stressors and increasing productivity, whereas women's continued high work stress and increased productivity may occur at the expense of decreased self-care. The challenges associated with having young children continue to affect the productivity and well-being of all faculty.

Misconceptions about women in leadership in academic medicine

Despite progress made over the past decade, women are under-represented in positions of leadership in academic medicine. Women physicians face numerous challenges throughout their careers. Despite achieving leadership positions, women in leadership continue to experience the impact of those challenges. In this review, we describe four misconceptions about women in leadership, along with their impact and recommendations. First, we describe differences between mentorship and sponsorship, as well as their impact on attaining leadership positions. Second, the gender pay gap persists throughout women's careers, regardless of leadership positions. Third, we explore the role of self-efficacy in leadership in the context of stereotype threats. Fourth, gendered expectations of leadership characteristics place an undue burden on women, detracting from their leadership effectiveness. Organizations can address the challenges women face by creating robust mentorship and sponsorship networks, establishing transparent and equitable pay policies, promoting and normalizing a broader range of leadership styles, and improving work flexibility and support structure. Ultimately, such changes serve all members of the organization through increased retention and engagement.

Does the COVID-19 Pandemic Affect Excellence in Academic Research? a Study of Science and Engineering Faculty Members in China

Research excellence is one of the key missions of universities and an important engine for socio-economic development. However, the outbreak of COVID-19 has affected academic research in many ways. This study examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the research performance of science and engineering faculty members in China's top research universities. It is found that the pandemic caused a decline in the numbers and quality of published articles, and the effects persisted over time. The negative effect of the pandemic on research excellence was more pronounced in the older faculty groups and departments of science. In addition, the pandemic has harmed international research collaborations among academics, which is likely to obstruct research excellence in the long run. In the end, this paper proposes several policy recommendations to reinvigorate universities' capacity for research innovation in the post-pandemic era.

Where the Sidewalk Ends: Parenting as a trainee during COVID-19

Physicians who are also parents have faced significant difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, most studies of the physician-parent workforce have focused on the experiences of attending physicians. In this commentary, we highlight the ways that trainee parents have uniquely experienced three major stressors during the pandemic: (1) childcare challenges, (2) scheduling difficulties, and (3) career uncertainties. We discuss potential solutions to mitigate these challenges for the future hematology/oncology workforce. As the pandemic continues, we hope that these steps can improve the ability of trainee parents to care both for their patients and their families.

Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors Moderate Associations between Work Stress and Exhaustion: Testing the Job Demands-Resources Model in Academic Staff at an Austrian Medical University

The time-intensive work of publishing in scientific journals is an important indicator of job performance that is given much weight during promotion procedures for academic positions. The current study applied the job demands–resources model and analyzed whether family supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB) moderated associations between work stress and feelings of exhaustion as a job resource and whether feelings of exhaustion ultimately mediated the link between work stress and academic employees’ publication activity. The current online cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted in 133 academic employees (65.4% women, 34.6% men; M_age = 41.9, SD = 10.1) at an Austrian medical university and assessed employees’ numbers of publications, H-index, work stress, feelings of exhaustion, FSSB, and work–family services used. Manifest path models revealed that FSSB moderated the link between experiencing high levels of work stress and strong feelings of exhaustion, especially in employees who had at least one child below the age of 18. Part-time employment was most strongly linked with lower numbers of publications and lower H-index levels. The finding that FSSB acted as a job resource mostly for employees with at least one child below 18 underlines the fact that FSSB is different from other forms of supervisor support. The current study supports recommendations to increase the amount of work–family services and to change organizational norms to be supportive of the successful management of family and work obligations.

Scientific authorship by gender: trends before and during a global pandemic

Many fields of science are still dominated by men. COVID-19 has dramatically changed the nature of work, including for scientists, such as lack of access to key resources and transition to online teaching. Further, scientists face the pandemic-related stressors common to other professions (e.g., childcare, eldercare). As many of these activities fall more heavily on women, the pandemic may have exacerbated gender disparities in science. We analyzed self-identified gender of corresponding author for 119,592 manuscripts from 151 countries submitted January 2019 to July 2021 to the Institute of Physics (IOP) portfolio of 57 academic journals, with disciplines of astronomy and astrophysics, bioscience, environmental science, materials, mathematics, physics, and interdisciplinary research. We consider differences by country, journal, and pre-pandemic versus pandemic periods. Gender was self-identified by corresponding author for 82.9% of manuscripts (N = 99,114 for subset of submissions with gender). Of these manuscripts, authors were 82.1% male, 17.8% female, and 0.08% non-binary. Most authors were male for all countries (country-specific values: range 0.0-100.0%, median 86.1%) and every journal (journal-specific values range 63.7-91.5%, median 83.7%). The contribution of female authors was slightly higher in the pandemic (18.7%) compared to pre-pandemic (16.5%). However, prior to the pandemic, the percent of submissions from women had been increasing, and this value slowed during the pandemic. Contrary to our hypothesis, we did not find that manuscript submissions from women decreased during the pandemic, although the rate of increased submissions evident prior to the pandemic slowed. In both pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, authorship was overwhelmingly male for all journals, countries, and fields. Further research is needed on impacts of the pandemic on other measures of scientific productivity (e.g., accepted manuscripts, teaching), scientific position (e.g., junior vs. senior scholars), as well as the underlying gender imbalance that persisted before and during the pandemic.