The Experts below are selected from a list of 10704 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jean Anderson Eloy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
gender representation at conferences executive boards and program committees in Otolaryngology
Laryngoscope, 2021Co-Authors: Gregory L Barinsky, Soly Baredes, Stacey T Gray, Deborah Daoud, Didem Tan, Samantha Y Cerasiello, Nicole A Silva, Jordon G Grube, Jean Anderson EloyAbstract:OBJECTIVE Women represent approximately 28.0% of academic otolaryngologists. Previous studies have shown that women in academic medicine, including surgical subspecialties, have disparate career advancement opportunities and grant funding compared to male counterparts. Representation at major academic meetings is an important career advancement opportunity. In this study, we assess the representation of women at Otolaryngology conferences. STUDY DESIGN Cross-sectional analysis of Otolaryngology conference programs. METHODS All publicly available scientific programs from The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation Annual Meeting (AAO-HNSF), the Triological Society Annual Combined Sections Meeting (TS), and the Triological Society Annual Meeting at Combined Otolaryngology Spring Meetings (TS-COSM) were obtained and analyzed. Name and gender were collected, along with the type of role: speaker, panelist, oral session moderator, and other leadership positions. Yearly trends were analyzed and compared between the conferences and in aggregate. RESULTS AAO-HNSF had available scientific programs from 2012-2017, while TS and TS-COSM had programs available from 2003-2018. Across all conferences and years, 16.9% of recorded opportunities were occupied by women, with an upward trend from 2005 to 2018. Program committees had the highest proportion of women (21.4%) and presidential citation and guest of honor recipients had the lowest (9.1%). Of all panels, 87.5% did not have any women panelists in 2003, but by 2018 only 24.0% panels were male-only. There was marked repetition among women occupying roles, with only 423 unique women occupying a total of 1,733 filled spots. CONCLUSION Measured representation of women in academic Otolaryngology conferences has improved from 2003-2018. Despite this improvement, gender disparity still exists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5 Laryngoscope, 131:E373-E379, 2021.
-
the Otolaryngology match a bibliometric analysis of 222 first year residents
Laryngoscope, 2019Co-Authors: Loka Thangamathesvaran, Soly Baredes, Nirali M Patel, Sana H Siddiqui, Roshansa Singh, Robert Wayne, Suat Kilic, Wayne D Hsueh, Jean Anderson EloyAbstract:OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS Research has long been acknowledged as important to successfully matriculate into an Otolaryngology residency position. The objective of this study is to perform a bibliometric analysis to quantify the importance of scholarly productivity in the Otolaryngology match process. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective database review. METHODS A list of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited Otolaryngology residency programs were identified. Websites of programs were reviewed to identify first-year Otolaryngology residents for the 2016 to 2017 academic year and compared to two previous academic years. Research output measures were collected. Residencies were tiered 1 to 5 by departmental research output. RESULTS Two hundred twenty-two records of first-year Otolaryngology residents starting residency in 2016 were identified. After adjusting for number of total publications, number of original research articles, number of review articles, number of case reports, number of first author publications, number of Otolaryngology-related publications, highest journal impact factor, average journal impact factor, and years since publication, h-index and number of total publications were associated with increasing tier of matriculation based on research output (P < .0001). Only number of publications correlated with increasing h-index (B = 1.11). With regard to applicant trends, there has been an increase in scholarly productivity as measured across all research parameters in the past 3 years. CONCLUSIONS Research is an important component of successfully matriculating into an Otolaryngology residency program. The h-index is a reliable tool to quantify research output and predict the tier of matriculation with regard to institutional research output. There has been a steadily increasing level of scholarly output among applicants in the past 3 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE NA Laryngoscope, 129:1561-1566, 2019.
-
gender differences in successful nih grant funding in Otolaryngology
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2013Co-Authors: Jean Anderson Eloy, Peter F Svider, Soly Baredes, Olga Kovalerchik, Evelyne Kalyoussef, Sujana S ChandrasekharAbstract:ObjectiveTo evaluate gender differences in NIH funding among faculty in Otolaryngology departments and discuss potential reasons for these differences.Study Design and SettingAnalysis of NIH funding data available on the online NIH RePORTER system.MethodsFiscal year 2011 and 2012 NIH funding awards to principal investigators (PIs) in Otolaryngology departments were obtained and used to examine faculty listings from Otolaryngology departments for academic rank and gender. The Scopus database was used to determine publication range of these faculty members.ResultsIndividual mean NIH awards to men ($362,946 ± $21,247 standard error of mean) were higher than those to women ($287,188 ± $38,029). Male PIs were found to have higher mean NIH funding totals (aggregating grants for PIs with multiple awards) than female PIs ($498,593 vs $359,276). Upon organization by academic rank and years active, men had significantly higher funding levels at both the level of assistant professor and at 10 to 20 years of experien...
-
is nih funding predictive of greater research productivity and impact among academic otolaryngologists
Laryngoscope, 2013Co-Authors: Peter F Svider, Kevin M Mauro, Michael Setzen, Soly Baredes, Saurin Sanghvi, Jean Anderson EloyAbstract:Objectives/Hypothesis: The h-index is an accurate and reliable indicator of scholarly productivity that takes into account relevance, significance, and influence of research contributions. As such, it is an effective, objective bibliometric that can be used to evaluate academic otolaryngologists for decisions regarding appointment and advancement. In this study, we evaluate the impact of NIH funding on scholarly productivity in Otolaryngology. Study Design: Analysis of bibliometric data of academic otolaryngologists. Methods: Funding data for the 20 Otolaryngology departments with the largest aggregate total of NIH grants for the fiscal years (FY) 2011 and 2012 was obtained using the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports (RePORTER) Database. H-indices were calculated using the Scopus online database, and then compared to funding data at both the departmental and individual level. Results: Faculty members in Otolaryngology departments who received NIH funding had significantly greater research productivity and impact, as measured by the h-index, than their nonfunded peers. H-indices increased with greater NIH funding levels, and investigators with MD degrees tended to have higher mean NIH funding levels than those with PhDs. While there was no correlation between average h-index and NIH funding totals at the level of departments, there was greater correlation upon examination of NIH funding levels of individual investigators. Conclusions: The h-index has a strong relationship with, and may be predictive of, grant awards of NIH-funded faculty members in Otolaryngology departments. This bibliometric may be useful in decisions regarding appointment and advancement of faculty members within academic Otolaryngology departments. Laryngoscope, 2013
-
the use of the h index in academic Otolaryngology
Laryngoscope, 2013Co-Authors: Peter F Svider, Jean Anderson Eloy, Soly Baredes, Zaid Choudhry, Osamah J Choudhry, James K LiuAbstract:Objective/Hypothesis: The h-index is an objective and easily calculable measure that can be used to evaluate both the relevance and amount of scientific contributions of an individual author. Our objective was to examine how the h-index of academic otolaryngologists relates with academic rank. Study Design: A descriptive and correlational design was used for analysis of academic otolaryngologists' h-indices using the Scopus database. Methods: H-indices of faculty members from 50 Otolaryngology residency programs were calculated using the Scopus database, and data was organized by academic rank. Additionally, an analysis of the h-indices of departmental chairpersons among different specialties was performed. Results: H-index values of academic otolaryngologists were higher with increased academic rank among the levels of assistant professor, associate professor, and professor. There was no significant difference between the h-indices of professors and department chairpersons within Otolaryngology. H-indices of chairpersons in different academic specialties were compared and were significantly different, suggesting that the use of this metric may not be appropriate for comparing different fields. Conclusions: The h-index is a reliable tool for quantifying academic productivity within Otolaryngology. This measure is easily calculable and may be useful when evaluating decisions regarding advancement within academic Otolaryngology departments. Comparison of this metric among faculty members from different fields, however, may not be reliable. Laryngoscope, 2013
Soly Baredes - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
gender representation at conferences executive boards and program committees in Otolaryngology
Laryngoscope, 2021Co-Authors: Gregory L Barinsky, Soly Baredes, Stacey T Gray, Deborah Daoud, Didem Tan, Samantha Y Cerasiello, Nicole A Silva, Jordon G Grube, Jean Anderson EloyAbstract:OBJECTIVE Women represent approximately 28.0% of academic otolaryngologists. Previous studies have shown that women in academic medicine, including surgical subspecialties, have disparate career advancement opportunities and grant funding compared to male counterparts. Representation at major academic meetings is an important career advancement opportunity. In this study, we assess the representation of women at Otolaryngology conferences. STUDY DESIGN Cross-sectional analysis of Otolaryngology conference programs. METHODS All publicly available scientific programs from The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation Annual Meeting (AAO-HNSF), the Triological Society Annual Combined Sections Meeting (TS), and the Triological Society Annual Meeting at Combined Otolaryngology Spring Meetings (TS-COSM) were obtained and analyzed. Name and gender were collected, along with the type of role: speaker, panelist, oral session moderator, and other leadership positions. Yearly trends were analyzed and compared between the conferences and in aggregate. RESULTS AAO-HNSF had available scientific programs from 2012-2017, while TS and TS-COSM had programs available from 2003-2018. Across all conferences and years, 16.9% of recorded opportunities were occupied by women, with an upward trend from 2005 to 2018. Program committees had the highest proportion of women (21.4%) and presidential citation and guest of honor recipients had the lowest (9.1%). Of all panels, 87.5% did not have any women panelists in 2003, but by 2018 only 24.0% panels were male-only. There was marked repetition among women occupying roles, with only 423 unique women occupying a total of 1,733 filled spots. CONCLUSION Measured representation of women in academic Otolaryngology conferences has improved from 2003-2018. Despite this improvement, gender disparity still exists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5 Laryngoscope, 131:E373-E379, 2021.
-
the Otolaryngology match a bibliometric analysis of 222 first year residents
Laryngoscope, 2019Co-Authors: Loka Thangamathesvaran, Soly Baredes, Nirali M Patel, Sana H Siddiqui, Roshansa Singh, Robert Wayne, Suat Kilic, Wayne D Hsueh, Jean Anderson EloyAbstract:OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS Research has long been acknowledged as important to successfully matriculate into an Otolaryngology residency position. The objective of this study is to perform a bibliometric analysis to quantify the importance of scholarly productivity in the Otolaryngology match process. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective database review. METHODS A list of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited Otolaryngology residency programs were identified. Websites of programs were reviewed to identify first-year Otolaryngology residents for the 2016 to 2017 academic year and compared to two previous academic years. Research output measures were collected. Residencies were tiered 1 to 5 by departmental research output. RESULTS Two hundred twenty-two records of first-year Otolaryngology residents starting residency in 2016 were identified. After adjusting for number of total publications, number of original research articles, number of review articles, number of case reports, number of first author publications, number of Otolaryngology-related publications, highest journal impact factor, average journal impact factor, and years since publication, h-index and number of total publications were associated with increasing tier of matriculation based on research output (P < .0001). Only number of publications correlated with increasing h-index (B = 1.11). With regard to applicant trends, there has been an increase in scholarly productivity as measured across all research parameters in the past 3 years. CONCLUSIONS Research is an important component of successfully matriculating into an Otolaryngology residency program. The h-index is a reliable tool to quantify research output and predict the tier of matriculation with regard to institutional research output. There has been a steadily increasing level of scholarly output among applicants in the past 3 years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE NA Laryngoscope, 129:1561-1566, 2019.
-
gender differences in successful nih grant funding in Otolaryngology
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2013Co-Authors: Jean Anderson Eloy, Peter F Svider, Soly Baredes, Olga Kovalerchik, Evelyne Kalyoussef, Sujana S ChandrasekharAbstract:ObjectiveTo evaluate gender differences in NIH funding among faculty in Otolaryngology departments and discuss potential reasons for these differences.Study Design and SettingAnalysis of NIH funding data available on the online NIH RePORTER system.MethodsFiscal year 2011 and 2012 NIH funding awards to principal investigators (PIs) in Otolaryngology departments were obtained and used to examine faculty listings from Otolaryngology departments for academic rank and gender. The Scopus database was used to determine publication range of these faculty members.ResultsIndividual mean NIH awards to men ($362,946 ± $21,247 standard error of mean) were higher than those to women ($287,188 ± $38,029). Male PIs were found to have higher mean NIH funding totals (aggregating grants for PIs with multiple awards) than female PIs ($498,593 vs $359,276). Upon organization by academic rank and years active, men had significantly higher funding levels at both the level of assistant professor and at 10 to 20 years of experien...
-
is nih funding predictive of greater research productivity and impact among academic otolaryngologists
Laryngoscope, 2013Co-Authors: Peter F Svider, Kevin M Mauro, Michael Setzen, Soly Baredes, Saurin Sanghvi, Jean Anderson EloyAbstract:Objectives/Hypothesis: The h-index is an accurate and reliable indicator of scholarly productivity that takes into account relevance, significance, and influence of research contributions. As such, it is an effective, objective bibliometric that can be used to evaluate academic otolaryngologists for decisions regarding appointment and advancement. In this study, we evaluate the impact of NIH funding on scholarly productivity in Otolaryngology. Study Design: Analysis of bibliometric data of academic otolaryngologists. Methods: Funding data for the 20 Otolaryngology departments with the largest aggregate total of NIH grants for the fiscal years (FY) 2011 and 2012 was obtained using the National Institutes of Health Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Reports (RePORTER) Database. H-indices were calculated using the Scopus online database, and then compared to funding data at both the departmental and individual level. Results: Faculty members in Otolaryngology departments who received NIH funding had significantly greater research productivity and impact, as measured by the h-index, than their nonfunded peers. H-indices increased with greater NIH funding levels, and investigators with MD degrees tended to have higher mean NIH funding levels than those with PhDs. While there was no correlation between average h-index and NIH funding totals at the level of departments, there was greater correlation upon examination of NIH funding levels of individual investigators. Conclusions: The h-index has a strong relationship with, and may be predictive of, grant awards of NIH-funded faculty members in Otolaryngology departments. This bibliometric may be useful in decisions regarding appointment and advancement of faculty members within academic Otolaryngology departments. Laryngoscope, 2013
-
the use of the h index in academic Otolaryngology
Laryngoscope, 2013Co-Authors: Peter F Svider, Jean Anderson Eloy, Soly Baredes, Zaid Choudhry, Osamah J Choudhry, James K LiuAbstract:Objective/Hypothesis: The h-index is an objective and easily calculable measure that can be used to evaluate both the relevance and amount of scientific contributions of an individual author. Our objective was to examine how the h-index of academic otolaryngologists relates with academic rank. Study Design: A descriptive and correlational design was used for analysis of academic otolaryngologists' h-indices using the Scopus database. Methods: H-indices of faculty members from 50 Otolaryngology residency programs were calculated using the Scopus database, and data was organized by academic rank. Additionally, an analysis of the h-indices of departmental chairpersons among different specialties was performed. Results: H-index values of academic otolaryngologists were higher with increased academic rank among the levels of assistant professor, associate professor, and professor. There was no significant difference between the h-indices of professors and department chairpersons within Otolaryngology. H-indices of chairpersons in different academic specialties were compared and were significantly different, suggesting that the use of this metric may not be appropriate for comparing different fields. Conclusions: The h-index is a reliable tool for quantifying academic productivity within Otolaryngology. This measure is easily calculable and may be useful when evaluating decisions regarding advancement within academic Otolaryngology departments. Comparison of this metric among faculty members from different fields, however, may not be reliable. Laryngoscope, 2013
Neil Bhattacharyya - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
rate of covid 19 infection in patients following Otolaryngology vs non Otolaryngology outpatient encounters
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2021Co-Authors: Neil Bhattacharyya, Alan D Workman, Mark A VarvaresAbstract:Routine outpatient Otolaryngology visits have been identified as potential vectors for increased transmission of COVID-19 relative to other medical encounters. This is in part due to the inability of patients to mask during comprehensive Otolaryngology examination and potential propensity for aerosolization during upper airway procedures, including endoscopy and nasopharyngoscopy. Using a matched-cohort sampling of >20,000 patients seen between April 2020 and January 2021, we found no increased rate of postvisit COVID-19 positivity following an in-office Otolaryngology encounter relative to other non-Otolaryngology outpatient encounters. This suggests that the perceived elevated risk of provider-to-patient and patient-to-patient transmission during outpatient otolaryngologic care may be unfounded.
-
clinical practice guideline benign paroxysmal positional vertigo update executive summary
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2017Co-Authors: Neil Bhattacharyya, Seth R Schwartz, Samuel P Gubbels, Jonathan A Edlow, Hussam K Elkashlan, Terry D Fife, Janene M Holmberg, Kathryn Mahoney, Deena B Hollingsworth, Richard RobertsAbstract:The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery featuring the “Clinical Practice Guideline: ...
-
involvement of physician extenders in ambulatory Otolaryngology practice
Laryngoscope, 2012Co-Authors: Neil BhattacharyyaAbstract:Objectives/Hypothesis: Determine the penetration and point-of-care patterns for physician extenders in ambulatory Otolaryngology practice. Study Design: Cross-sectional analysis of national database. Methods: The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey was examined for 2008 and 2009, extracting all cases of ambulatory visits to an Otolaryngology outpatient setting. Visit types were then segregated according to providers seen including physician, advanced practice clinicians (APCs) (nurse practitioner and/or physician assistant) and nurses. Visit types were determined (physician alone, physician with APC, or APC alone) as well as type of patient seen (new vs. established patient). The top 10 diagnoses were compiled according to provider visit type. Results: An estimated 38.6 ± 3.7 million outpatient office Otolaryngology visits were studied. An APC was seen in 6.3 ± 2.0% of visits (physician assistant, 4.6 ± 1.9% visits; nurse practitioner, 1.7 ± 0.9% of visits), and a nurse was involved in 25.1 ± 7.6% of visits. Nurse practitioners were more likely see patients independently (47.7%) than were physician assistants (23.3%). APCs were more likely to be involved with established patient visits (7.2 ± 2.3%) rather than new patient visits (4.3 ± 1.8%, P = .08). Disorders of the external and middle ears were the most common diagnoses seen by APCs. Conclusions: Although APCs are expected to expand numbers in Otolaryngology, contemporary data indicate that current penetration of APCs into ambulatory Otolaryngology care remains relatively limited. These data provide an initial assessment for future modeling of APCs and otolaryngologic care.
-
measurable progress in female authorship in Otolaryngology
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2012Co-Authors: Jennifer L Bergeron, Reason Wilken, Mia E Miller, Nina L Shapiro, Neil BhattacharyyaAbstract:ObjectiveTo identify contemporary trends in female authorship in the Otolaryngology literature.Study DesignAnalysis of 4 Otolaryngology journals.SettingAll articles published in Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, Archives of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Laryngoscope, and Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery in 2008 were reviewed and compared with prior data from 1978, 1988, and 1998.Subjects and MethodsEach published article’s authorship panel was examined for the number of authors and each author’s sex, degree, and the subspecialty area of publication. Year-to-year comparisons were conducted for the rates and characteristics of female authorship.ResultsA total of 544, 629, 713, and 785 articles from 1978, 1988, 1998, and 2008, respectively, were analyzed. From 1998 to 2008, the overall percentage of female authors increased from 14.5% to 22.5% (P < .001). Similarly, the percentage of articles with a female first author increased from 12.9% to 21.3% (P < .001). Whereas previously pedia...
David W Kennedy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Otolaryngology workforce analysis
Laryngoscope, 2016Co-Authors: Charles Anthony Hughes, Patrick Mcmenamin, Vikas Mehta, Harold C Pillsbury, David W KennedyAbstract:Objectives/Hypothesis The number of trained otolaryngologists available is insufficient to supply current and projected US health care needs. The goal of this study was to assess available databases and present accurate data on the current Otolaryngology workforce, examine methods for prediction of future health care needs, and explore potential issues with forecasting methods and policy implementation based on these predictions. Study Design Retrospective analysis of research databases, public use files, and claims data. Methods The total number of otolaryngologists and current practices in the United States was tabulated using the databases of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, American Medical Association, American Board of Otolaryngology, American College of Surgeons, Association of American Medical Colleges, National Center for Health Statistics, and Department of Health and Human Services. Otolaryngologists were identified as surgeons and classified into surgical groups using a combination of AMA primary and secondary self-reported specialties and American Board of Medical Specialties certifications. Data gathered were cross-referenced to rule out duplications to assess total practicing otolaryngologists. Data analyzed included type of practice: 1) academic versus private and 2) general versus specialty; and demographics: 1) urban versus rural, 2) patient age, 3) reason for visit (referral, new, established, surgical follow-up), 4) reason for visit (diagnosis), and 5) payer type. Results Analysis from the above resources estimates the total number of otolaryngologists practicing in the United States in 2011 to be 12,609, with approximately 10,522 fully trained practicing physicians (9,232–10,654) and 2,087 in training (1,318 residents and 769 fellows/others). Based on 2011 data, workforce projections would place the fully trained and practicing Otolaryngology workforce at 11,088 in 2015 and 12,084 in 2025 unless changes in training occur. The AAO-HNS Physicians Resource Committee performed an extensive analysis of collated data from multiple sources in 2014 and identified 10,800 practicing otolaryngologists and 2,087 in training. It is estimated that the current attrition rate is approximately 306 otolaryngologists per year. Percentage distribution of office visits by patient age was found to be 20% <15 years old, 7% 15 to 24 years old, 21% 25 to 44 years old, 32% 45 to 64 years old, 11% 65 to 74 years old, and 10% ≥75 years old. Reason for visit was 34% new, 29% chronic, 17% chronic with exacerbation, and 15% pre- or postsurgical follow-up. The top diagnoses consisted of otitis media, chronic sinusitis, and impacted cerumen. Payer mix consisted of 59% private insurance, 19% Medicare, and 12% Medicaid/Children's Health Insurance Program. Conclusions Despite past findings and predictions of 8,000 to 8,500 otolaryngologists practicing in the United States, collated data from above resources places the total at 12,887, with 10,800 fully trained and practicing in 2014. This 30% to 50% underestimation of the Otolaryngology workforce has an impact on future predictions and resource utilization analysis. Even when this correction is considered, the available trained otolaryngologists required to serve the otolaryngologic health care needs of the US population are still insufficient and understaffed. The impact of an aging population and the estimated 30 to 47 million newly insured citizens under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are also unprecedented variables that must be considered. Further analysis of differences in physician productivity and geographic population density, and model formation of current Otolaryngology workforce utilization, are needed to predict future public health needs. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 2016
-
Otolaryngology head and neck surgery physician work force issues an analysis for future specialty planning
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2012Co-Authors: Jin Suk C Kim, Richard A Cooper, David W KennedyAbstract:Objective. To predict future trends in the Otolaryngology workforce and propose solutions to correct the identified discrepancies between supply and demand.Study Design. Economic modeling and analysis.Setting. Data sets at national medical and economic organizations.Subjects and Methods. Based on current American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, American Medical Association, and National Residency Matching Program data sets, population census data, and historical physician growth demand curves, the future Otolaryngology workforce supply and demand were modeled. Adjustments were made for projected increases in mid-level providers, increased insurance coverage, and the potential effects of lifestyle preferences.Results. There are currently approximately 8600 otolaryngologists in the United States. Estimated demand by 2025 is 11,127 based on projected population growth and anticipated increase in insurance coverage. With an average retirement age of 65 years and no increase in PGY-1 positions...
Michael J Cunningham - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
charles f ferguson md america s first full time pediatric otolaryngologist
International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 2021Co-Authors: Michael J CunninghamAbstract:Abstract Introduction Each year the Program Committee of the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology bestows three Charles Ferguson Clinical Science Awards. Who was Dr. Charles Ferguson, and why do these prestigious awards carry his name? Methods Historical review. Results Dr. Charles Ferguson officially joined the Boston Children's Hospital surgical staff in 1940. He was hired by the surgeon-in-chief William Ladd to devote his Otolaryngology practice solely to children. His career at Boston Children's Hospital spanned 38 years. Disorders of the larynx, trachea and bronchi were his principal professional focus. He was the guest editor of a 1962 Pediatric Clinics of North America Symposium on Ear, Nose and Throat Problems, and subsequently edited the first Pediatric Otolaryngology textbook in 1972. His pioneering work in pediatric airway endoscopy and the development of techniques to diagnose congenital airway malformations led to his receipt of the Chevalier Jackson Award from the American Bronchoesophagological Association in 1974, and the James Newcomb Award from the American Laryngological Society in 1979. Together with contemporaries Seymour Cohen in Los Angeles and Blair Fearon in Toronto, he set the foundation for the creation of the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology in 1984, six years following his retirement. Conclusion Recognizing his contributions as truly the “father of pediatric Otolaryngology”, the Society granted Dr. Ferguson honorary membership in 1987, and established the Charles Ferguson Clinical Science Awards to sustain his legacy.
-
healthcare disparities in pediatric Otolaryngology a systematic review
Laryngoscope, 2018Co-Authors: Jad Jabbour, Michael J Cunningham, Thomas RobeyAbstract:Objectives Multiple studies have reported healthcare disparities in particular settings and conditions within pediatric Otolaryngology, but a systematic examination of the breadth of the problem within the field is lacking. This study's objectives are to synthesize the available evidence regarding healthcare disparities in pediatric Otolaryngology, highlight recurrent themes with respect to etiologies and manifestations, and demonstrate potential impacts from patient and provider standpoints. Methods A qualitative systematic review of the PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane databases for articles focusing on racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic disparities related to pediatric Otolaryngology conditions or settings was conducted. United States-based studies of any design or publication date with analysis of children 0 to 18 years old were included. Results Of 711 abstracts identified, 39 met inclusion criteria. Manual review of references from these articles yielded 22 additional studies, for a total of 61. Disparities were identified in nearly every subspecialty within pediatric Otolaryngology, with otologic conditions the most frequently studied (33 of 61). The most commonly cited disparities involved low socioeconomic status (25 of 61), inadequate insurance (23 of 61), nonwhite race (21 of 61), and barriers to accessing care (21 of 61). Only six articles found no disparities regarding the condition examined in their study. Conclusion Through a variety of study topics, designs, and settings, a growing body of literature documents disparities across the spectrum of pediatric Otolaryngology care. The etiologies and manifestations of such disparities are myriad. This evidence suggests the need for interventions to address these disparities at various professional and institutional levels, ideally with methodological rigor to assess the effectiveness of such interventions. Laryngoscope, 128:1699-1713, 2018.
-
trends in pediatric Otolaryngology disparities research
Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2018Co-Authors: Jad Jabbour, Michael J Cunningham, Thomas Robey, Karl W DoerferAbstract:Objectives To describe trends in disparities research within pediatric Otolaryngology as evidenced by major meeting presentations and to compare observed trends with those in the realm of patient safety and quality improvement (PSQI). Study Design Retrospective review of presentations at national Otolaryngology meetings. Setting Online review of meeting programs. Subjects and Methods Meeting programs from the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology, Triological Society, American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, and Society for Ear, Nose and Throat Advances in Children from 2003 to 2016 were manually searched for pediatric oral and poster presentations addressing disparities and socioeconomic determinants of health, as well as PSQI. Presentation frequency was compared between categories and within each category over time. Results Of 11,311 total presentations, 3078 were related to the pediatric population, and 1945 (63.2%) of those were oral presentations. Disparities-related presentations increased from 0 in 2003 to 17 in 2016. From 2003 to 2009, 9 of 656 (1.4%) presentations involved disparities, as opposed to 70 of 2422 (2.9%) from 2010 to 2016 ( P = .03). The proportion of presentations regarding PSQI also increased: from 42 of 656 (6.4%) in 2003-2009 to 221 of 2422 (9.1%) in 2010-2016 ( P = .01). PSQI presentations remain more common than disparities presentations (9.1% vs 2.9%, P < .001). Conclusion Health care disparities are increasingly addressed in pediatric Otolaryngology meeting presentations. Compared with the well-established realm of PSQI, disparities research remains nascent but is gaining attention. Health care reform and quality improvement efforts should recognize the role of socioeconomic factors and include strategies for addressing disparities.
-
Otolaryngology education in family medicine and communication sciences training
Archives of Otolaryngology-head & Neck Surgery, 2011Co-Authors: Samir Baig, Michael J CunninghamAbstract:Objectives To characterize the extent and format of Otolaryngology instruction during family medicine and communication disorders training and to determine the comfort level of graduate trainees to assess specific hearing disorders. Design Online surveys were sent to program directors in the fields of family medicine, audiology, and speech pathology. Directors were asked to delineate methods of teaching Otolaryngology-related material and to define how often otolaryngologists were involved in their curricula. They were also asked to rate their graduate trainees' ability to manage 3 clinical scenarios involving pediatric hearing impairment. Participants A total of 682 surveys were sent using e-mail addresses from the American Medical Association and the Council of Academic Programs in Communication Sciences and Disorders. Results Response rates were 20% for family medicine programs and 30% for each of the communication science disciplines. Virtually all respondent family medicine programs have dedicated instruction in Otolaryngology, typically in the form of a clinical rotation (98%). Ninety-five percent of audiology programs involve an otolaryngologist in teaching compared with 55% of speech pathology programs. Otolaryngology-related diagnostic examination skills are taught by most programs in all 3 disciplines; confirmation of skills acquisition, however, is lacking. Directors rated the competence of their trainees to manage hearing disorders at an average of 3.4 for audiology, 2.7 for speech pathology, and 2.6 for family medicine graduates on a 4-point scale. Conclusions Respondent directors from all 3 disciplines make a concerted effort to teach Otolaryngology-related topics. A greater emphasis on those Otolaryngology disorders requiring multidisciplinary care appears necessary, as does more formal instruction in and competency evaluation of diagnostic examination skills.
-
pediatric Otolaryngology the maturation of a pediatric surgical subspecialty
Laryngoscope, 2011Co-Authors: Michael J Cunningham, Aaron LinAbstract:Objectives/Hypothesis: To review the historical development of pediatric Otolaryngology as a surgical subspecialty and to compare and contrast this historical development with that of pediatric surgery and pediatric urology. Study Design: Literature search. Methods: A sequential comparison of these three surgical subspecialties was undertaken in terms of their early origins and founding physicians, sections and societies, standardization of training and accreditation, official recognition, and certification. Supportive materials were obtained via a literature search using the PubMed database from 1950 to the present, supplemented by archived material from the libraries of the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary and the Countway Library of the Harvard Medical School. Results: Pediatric surgery, urology, and Otolaryngology have taken somewhat parallel but also disparate paths toward surgical subspecialty establishment. Conclusions: Pediatric Otolaryngology, despite its many accomplishments, lags behind its surgical and urologic brethren from both an accreditation and certification standpoint. Laryngoscope, 2011
