ABSTRACT
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Fellowship program directors (FPDs) play an important role in the development of fellows and learners, but little is known about their demographics. This cross-sectional study aims to examine the characteristics of minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS) FPDs. DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Data obtained from publicly available information on official websites of the program directors studied. SUBJECTS: MIGS fellowship program directors. INTERVENTIONS: All US-based MIGS programs affiliated with the AAGL in 2023 were included. Information about FPD gender, medical school attended and graduation year, residency program attended and graduation year, any additional graduate degrees earned, fellowship programs completed, and the year of their appointment as FPD was collected through publicly available sources. Scholarly activity was measured by peer-reviewed articles and the Hirsch index. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 54 FPDs, 28 (51.85%) were female and 26 (48.15%) were male. Male FPDs were significantly older (54.6 ± 8.7 years) than female FPDs (46.2 ± 5.0 years), p <.05. Average age at appointment was 43.1 ± 6.7 years, with female FPDs being appointed at significantly younger ages (39.4 ± 5.1 years) compared to male FPDs (44.5 ± 6.8 years), p <.05. Male FPDs had statistically significant higher Hirsch indices (14 ± 11.4) compared to female FPDs (8 ± 5.8), p <.05. Of the FPDs who completed a fellowship, 27 (50%) did so in MIGS, eight (14.81%) in Gynecologic-Oncology, 6 (11.11%) in Urogynecology, and 4 (7.41%) in Reproductive Endocrinology/Infertility. CONCLUSIONS: MIGS fellowships have a uniquely equal representation of male and female FPDs, as surgical subspecialties historically tend to be male dominant. Notably, there is diversity in the type of fellowship pursued by MIGS FPDs, with nearly half of FPDs completing a fellowship outside of MIGS. The reasons for differences in scholarly contributions, indicated by Hirsch index, of male versus female FPDs is unclear.
Subject(s)
Fellowships and Scholarships , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Humans , Female , Fellowships and Scholarships/statistics & numerical data , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures/education , Male , Retrospective Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Adult , Middle Aged , United States , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/education , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Internship and Residency , Gynecology/educationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Experts in gynecological cancer care recommend that all patients with invasive or high-grade ovarian cancer (OC) undergo genetic testing. However, even patients who intend to take or have taken genetic tests have many unaddressed information needs regarding genetic testing. Existing genetic counseling falls short of adequately addressing this challenge. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the genetic testing-related information needs of patients with OC to inform the design of interactive technology-based interventions that can enhance communication of genetic testing information to patients. METHODS: We interviewed 20 patients with OC who had taken genetic tests and gathered genetic testing-related messages from an active OC web-based community. The interview transcripts and web-based community messages were analyzed using the qualitative content analysis method. RESULTS: Data analyses produced a comprehensive taxonomy of the genetic testing-related information needs of patients with OC, which included five major topic clusters: knowledge of genetic testing as a medical test, genetic testing process, genetic testing implications for patients, implications for family members, and medical terminology. Findings indicated that patients wanted to receive information that was relevant, understandable, concise, usable, appropriate, sympathetic, and available when needed. They also preferred various channels to receive information, including internet-based technologies, print, and conversations with health care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OC need a range of information to address the uncertainties and challenges that they encounter while taking genetic tests. Their preferences for channels to receive information vary widely. A multichannel information delivery solution that combines both provider-led and peer-to-peer education models is needed to supplement existing genetic counseling to effectively meet the genetic testing-related information needs of patients with OC.
