Benchmarking the research track record and level of appointment of Australian medical laboratory science academics

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking across and within universities is a common tool to evaluate performance of a program and maintain accreditation requirements. While teaching remains a primary responsibility of many academics, academic research performance is a major contributor towards career advancement and standards in the medical laboratory science profession. While anecdotal evidence suggests academics are active contributors to the evidence base of the profession, there is a high variability in research output in relation to institution and level of appointment. The aim of the study was to benchmark the research track record of Australian medical laboratory science academics and provide insight into how research productivity informs the level of appointment of academics across their career pathway. METHODS: A bibliographic analysis of Australian medical laboratory science faculty websites and corresponding Scopus citation database profiles was conducted. A description of current research track record and relationships with holding a doctorate, academic appointment level, research and teaching interests, and institutional characteristics were explored. Quantitative data and frequencies were analysed using IBM SPSS version 26 to benchmark research track records by academic appointment level. RESULTS: There were 124 academics identified from 13 universities who had a teaching and research position in an undergraduate medical laboratory science program in Australia. Academics at the level of lecturer or higher typically held a doctorate (89%). Holding a doctorate strongly influenced the number of publications. The top 20% of researchers authored around half of the overall publications. The majority of academics did not have alignment of their major research and teaching areas however, alignment had no influence on number of publications. There was, however, an inconsistent relationship between metropolitan or regional university location and the number of publications. CONCLUSION: Data from this study provides academics with benchmarks for the research track record required at each level of appointment. When drawing conclusions on academic progression, promotion and tenure through research track record it would be mindful to assess each on a case by case basis. Institution (metropolitan versus regional) and research interest appears to influence publication number, h-index and citation scores.