Journal of surgical education · 2024
Vice Chairs of Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Prevalence, Scope, and Ongoing Challenges.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shah Divya K, Chen Katherine T, Hammoud Maya M, Berkowitz Lori R, Winkel Abigail Ford
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of the Vice Chair of Education (VCE) role in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) departments and to describe the demographics, responsibilities, resource allocation, and challenges faced by individuals in this role.
DESIGN: A 2-part survey was developed with the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics (APGO) Member Engagement Workgroup.
SETTING: National survey.
PARTICIPANTS: Part 1 was sent to OBGYN department chairs to identify departments with a VCE and to assess characteristics of departments without 1. Part 2 was sent directly to VCEs to assess characteristics of the department and the individual VCE, including demographics, academic appointments, leadership and educational experience, responsibilities, and institutional support. Chi-squared tests were used to compare departments with and without VCE.
RESULTS: 196 of 256 OBGYN chairs (76.5%) responded to part 1 of the survey, and 71 of 86 VCEs (82.5%) responded to part 2 of the survey. The prevalence of the VCE role was 43.9%. Departments with a VCE had larger numbers of faculty, residents, and medical students, and were more likely to identify as university-affiliated (all p < 0.001). A majority of VCEs identified as women (82.1%), associate professors (55.0%), and academic specialists (51%), with 62.3% serving as the inaugural VCE in their department. Approximately half of VCEs have a defined job description, and only 35.8% controlled an educational budget. Two-thirds (65.7%) of VCEs received full-time equivalent (FTE) support for the role, with 37.1% receiving 0.2 FTE.
CONCLUSIONS: The VCE role remains relatively new in OBGYN. Optimizing success of individuals in this role requires increased job clarity, adequate support, and ongoing opportunities for career development.
DESIGN: A 2-part survey was developed with the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics (APGO) Member Engagement Workgroup.
SETTING: National survey.
PARTICIPANTS: Part 1 was sent to OBGYN department chairs to identify departments with a VCE and to assess characteristics of departments without 1. Part 2 was sent directly to VCEs to assess characteristics of the department and the individual VCE, including demographics, academic appointments, leadership and educational experience, responsibilities, and institutional support. Chi-squared tests were used to compare departments with and without VCE.
RESULTS: 196 of 256 OBGYN chairs (76.5%) responded to part 1 of the survey, and 71 of 86 VCEs (82.5%) responded to part 2 of the survey. The prevalence of the VCE role was 43.9%. Departments with a VCE had larger numbers of faculty, residents, and medical students, and were more likely to identify as university-affiliated (all p < 0.001). A majority of VCEs identified as women (82.1%), associate professors (55.0%), and academic specialists (51%), with 62.3% serving as the inaugural VCE in their department. Approximately half of VCEs have a defined job description, and only 35.8% controlled an educational budget. Two-thirds (65.7%) of VCEs received full-time equivalent (FTE) support for the role, with 37.1% receiving 0.2 FTE.
CONCLUSIONS: The VCE role remains relatively new in OBGYN. Optimizing success of individuals in this role requires increased job clarity, adequate support, and ongoing opportunities for career development.