Cargando…

Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey

BACKGROUND: Faculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kairouz, Victor F, Raad, Dany, Fudyma, John, Curtis, Anne B, Schünemann, Holger J, Akl, Elie A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4189191/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25257232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-205
_version_ 1782338322578800640
author Kairouz, Victor F
Raad, Dany
Fudyma, John
Curtis, Anne B
Schünemann, Holger J
Akl, Elie A
author_facet Kairouz, Victor F
Raad, Dany
Fudyma, John
Curtis, Anne B
Schünemann, Holger J
Akl, Elie A
author_sort Kairouz, Victor F
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Faculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. METHODS: We surveyed the Chairs of academic Departments of Medicine in the United States in 2012. We sent a paper-based questionnaire along with a personalized invitation letter by postal mail. For non-responders, we sent reminder letters, then called them and faxed them the questionnaire. The questionnaire included 8 questions with 23 tabulated close-ended items about the types of productivity measured (clinical, research, teaching, administrative) and the measurement strategies used. We conducted descriptive analyses. RESULTS: Chairs of 78 of 152 eligible departments responded to the survey (51% response rate). Overall, 82% of respondents reported measuring at least one type of faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. Amongst those measuring faculty productivity, types measured were: clinical (98%), research (61%), teaching (62%), and administrative (64%). Percentages of respondents who reported the use of standardized measurements units (e.g., Relative Value Units (RVUs)) varied from 17% for administrative productivity to 95% for research productivity. Departments reported a wide variation of what exact activities are measured and how they are monetarily compensated. Most compensation plans take into account academic rank (77%). The majority of compensation plans are in the form of a bonus on top of a fixed salary (66%) and/or an adjustment of salary based on previous period productivity (55%). CONCLUSION: Our survey suggests that most academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity and convert it into standardized units for the purpose of salary compensation. The exact activities that are measured and how they are monetarily compensated varied substantially across departments. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1472-6920-14-205) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4189191
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41891912014-10-09 Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey Kairouz, Victor F Raad, Dany Fudyma, John Curtis, Anne B Schünemann, Holger J Akl, Elie A BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Faculty productivity is essential for academic medical centers striving to achieve excellence and national recognition. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether and how academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. METHODS: We surveyed the Chairs of academic Departments of Medicine in the United States in 2012. We sent a paper-based questionnaire along with a personalized invitation letter by postal mail. For non-responders, we sent reminder letters, then called them and faxed them the questionnaire. The questionnaire included 8 questions with 23 tabulated close-ended items about the types of productivity measured (clinical, research, teaching, administrative) and the measurement strategies used. We conducted descriptive analyses. RESULTS: Chairs of 78 of 152 eligible departments responded to the survey (51% response rate). Overall, 82% of respondents reported measuring at least one type of faculty productivity for the purpose of salary compensation. Amongst those measuring faculty productivity, types measured were: clinical (98%), research (61%), teaching (62%), and administrative (64%). Percentages of respondents who reported the use of standardized measurements units (e.g., Relative Value Units (RVUs)) varied from 17% for administrative productivity to 95% for research productivity. Departments reported a wide variation of what exact activities are measured and how they are monetarily compensated. Most compensation plans take into account academic rank (77%). The majority of compensation plans are in the form of a bonus on top of a fixed salary (66%) and/or an adjustment of salary based on previous period productivity (55%). CONCLUSION: Our survey suggests that most academic Departments of Medicine in the United States measure faculty productivity and convert it into standardized units for the purpose of salary compensation. The exact activities that are measured and how they are monetarily compensated varied substantially across departments. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1472-6920-14-205) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-09-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4189191/ /pubmed/25257232 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-205 Text en © Kairouz et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kairouz, Victor F
Raad, Dany
Fudyma, John
Curtis, Anne B
Schünemann, Holger J
Akl, Elie A
Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey
title Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey
title_full Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey
title_fullStr Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey
title_short Assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the United States: a national survey
title_sort assessment of faculty productivity in academic departments of medicine in the united states: a national survey
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4189191/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25257232
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-14-205
work_keys_str_mv AT kairouzvictorf assessmentoffacultyproductivityinacademicdepartmentsofmedicineintheunitedstatesanationalsurvey
AT raaddany assessmentoffacultyproductivityinacademicdepartmentsofmedicineintheunitedstatesanationalsurvey
AT fudymajohn assessmentoffacultyproductivityinacademicdepartmentsofmedicineintheunitedstatesanationalsurvey
AT curtisanneb assessmentoffacultyproductivityinacademicdepartmentsofmedicineintheunitedstatesanationalsurvey
AT schunemannholgerj assessmentoffacultyproductivityinacademicdepartmentsofmedicineintheunitedstatesanationalsurvey
AT akleliea assessmentoffacultyproductivityinacademicdepartmentsofmedicineintheunitedstatesanationalsurvey