Background Involvement in scholarly activities is considered to be one of the foundational pillars of medical education. Objective This study aims to investigate publication rates before, during, and after residency to determine whether research productivity throughout medical training correlates with future academic success and research involvement. Methods We successfully identified a list of 296 graduates from 25 US dermatology residency programs from the years 2013-2015. The publication history for each graduate was compiled using Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. The Pearson correlation test and linear regression were used to assess the relationship between research productivity and continued academic success after residency graduation. Results Before residency, graduates published a mean of 1.9 (SD 3.5) total publications and a mean of 0.88 (SD 1.5) first-author publications. During residency, graduates published a mean of 2.7 (SD 3.6) total publications and a mean of 1.39 (SD 2.0) first-author publications. Graduates who pursued a fellowship had more total publications (t294=−4.0; P<.001), more first-author publications (t294=−3.9; P<.001), and a higher h-index (t294=−3.8; P=.002). Graduates who chose to pursue careers in academic medicine had more mean total publications (t294=−7.5; P<.001), more first-author publications (t294=−5.9; P<.001), and a higher mean h-index (t294=−6.9; P<.001). Graduates with one or more first-author publications before residency were 1.3 times more likely to pursue a career in academic medicine (adjusted odds ratio 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5). Graduates who pursued a fellowship were also 1.9 times more likely to pursue a career in academic medicine (adjusted odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.2). Conclusions Our results suggest that research productivity before and during residency training are potential markers for continued academic success and research involvement after completing dermatology residency training.

No abstract

Aims: Currently, there is a growing body of research demonstrating that spinthe misinterpretation and distortion of a study's findings-is common in different fields of medicine. To our knowledge, no study has investigated its presence in systematic reviews focused on diabetic therapies.Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study by searching MEDLINE and Embase for systematic reviews focused on pharmacologic treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Our search retrieved 26,490 records, from which 199 studies were extracted in a masked, duplicate fashion. Each study was evaluated for the nine most severe types of spin and other study design parameters. Spin was presented as frequencies and odds ratios to identify associations between study characteristics.Results: Spin was identified in the abstracts of 15 systematic reviews (15/199, 7.5%). Spin type 5 was the most common type identified (7/199, 3.5%). Spin types 1, 2, 4 and 8 were not identified. In the last 5 years (2016)(2017)(2018)(2019)(2020)(2021), seven systematic reviews contained spin within their abstract. There was no association between the presence of spins and any extracted study characteristic. Conclusions:Our findings show that spin infrequently occurs in the abstracts of systematic reviews focused on pharmacologic therapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, any amount of spin can lead to the distortion of a reader's interpretation of the study's findings. Thus, we provide recommendations with rationale to prevent spin in future systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND Involvement in scholarly activities is considered to be one of the foundational pillars of medical education. Thus, we investigated publication rates before, during, and after residency to determine whether research productivity throughout medical training correlates with future academic successes. OBJECTIVE We investigated publication rates before, during, and after residency to determine whether research productivity throughout medical training correlates with future academic successes. METHODS We successfully identified a list of 296 graduates from 25 U.S. dermatology residency programs from the years 2013-2015. Publication history for each graduate was compiled using SCOPUS, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Pearson correlation test and linear regression were used to assess for a relationship between research productivity and continued academic success after residency graduation. RESULTS Before residency, graduates published a mean of 1.9 total publications (SD=3.5) and a mean of 0.88 first-author publications (SD=1.5). During residency, graduates published a mean of 2.7 total publications (SD=3.6) and a mean of 1.39 first-author publications (SD=2.0). Graduates who pursued a fellowship had more total publications (t294=-4.0, p <.001), first-author author publications (t294=-3.9, p <.001), and higher h-index (t294= -3.8, p <.002). Graduates who chose to pursue careers in academic medicine had a higher number of mean total publications (t294=-7.5, p <.0001), first author publications (t294=-5.9, p <.0001), and mean h-index (t294=-6.9, p <.0001). Graduates with one or more first author publications before residency were 1.3 times more likely to pursue a career in academic medicine (aOR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5). Graduates who pursued a fellowship were also 1.9 times more likely to pursue a career in academic medicine (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-3.2). CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that research productivity before and during residency training are potential markers for continued academic success after completing dermatology residency training.