Academic literature on the topic 'American Association of University Women. Committee on Fellowships'

Sir William Osler’s legacy lives on through the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM). Osler was in 1911 founding President both of the Postgraduate Medical Association and on 1981 of the Inter-allied Fellowship of Medicine. These societies merged later in 1919, with Osler as President until his death at the end of that year. This joint organization was initially called the Fellowship of Medicine and Post-Graduate Medical Association and continues to this day as the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine. In the 1880s, in his role as medical leader in North America, Osler pioneered hospital residency programmes for junior trainee doctors. As Regius Professor of medicine in Oxford from 1905, Osler wished early postgraduate teaching in the UK, and in London in particular, to include access to ‘the wealth of material at all the hospitals’. He also saw medical societies as important for providing reliable continuous medical develop for senior doctors.Under Osler’s leadership, the Fellowship of Medicine responded to demand for postgraduate civilian medical training after the First World War, supported by a general committee of 73 senior medical figures, with representatives from the British Army Medical Service, Medical Services of the Dominions of the United Kingdom, of America and of the British Colleges and major medical Schools. Some fifty general and specialist hospitals were initially affiliated with the Fellowship, which provided sustained support of postgraduate training well into the 1920s, including publication of a weekly bulletin of clinics, ward rounds, special lectures and organized training courses for men and women of all nationalities. In 1925, in response to expanding interest in postgraduate education, the Fellowship developed the bulletin into the Postgraduate Medical Journal, which continues as a monthly international publication. Stimulated by discussions at meetings of the FPM, through its Fellows, the FPM was influential in encouraging London and regional teaching hospitals to develop and maintain postgraduate training courses. The FPM and its Fellows also were important in supporting the creation of a purely postgraduate medical school, which was eventually founded at the Hammersmith Hospital in West London as the British, then Royal Postgraduate Medical School.At the end of the Second World War, there was a major development in provision of postgraduate medical education with the founding in 1945 of the British Postgraduate Medical Federation, which was supported by government, the University Grants Committee and the universities. There was also a marked post-war increase in general provision of postgraduate training at individual hospitals and within the medical Royal Colleges. Postgraduate Centres were established at many hospitals.Nonetheless the FPM continued some involvement in postgraduate courses until 1975. Since then the FPM has maintained a national and international role in postgraduate education through its journals, the Postgraduate Medical Journal and Health Policy and Technology (founded in 2012) and by affiliations with other organisations and institutes.Osler was an avid supporter of engagement between medicine and the humanities, chiding humanists for ignorance of modern science and fellow scientists for neglecting the humanities. The FPM has over much of the past decade supported this theme of Osler by being a major patron of the Hippocrates Prize for Poetry and Medicine, which has achieved significant international interest, with over 10,000 entries from over 70 countries.

Purpose From the Audiology Education Summit held in 2017, several working groups were formed to explore ideas about improving the quality and consistency in graduate education in audiology and externship training. The results are described here from one of the working groups formed to examine postgraduate specialization fellowships. Method Over the course of a year, the committee designed and implemented two surveys: one directed toward faculty and one toward students. The rationale for the survey and the results are presented. Comparisons between faculty and student responses are made for similar questions. Results Overall, the results demonstrate that the majority of both students and faculty believe that postgraduation specialization fellowships are needed for either 1 year or a flexible length. There was a consensus of opinion that the fellowship should be paid, as these would be designed for licensed audiologists. Most believed that the fellowships should be “governed by a professional organization (e.g., American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, American Academy of Audiology, American Doctors of Audiology, etc.),” or less so, a “separate body for this specific purpose.” Potential topics for specialization identified were the following: tinnitus, vestibular, cochlear implants, pediatrics, and intraoperative monitoring. The highest priority attributes for a specialization site were “abundant access to patient populations,” “staff of clinical experts,” and “active research.” The weight put toward these attributes differed between faculty and students with faculty prioritizing “university/academic centers,” and “access to academic coursework in the fellowship area.” The faculty rated “caseload diversity,” “minimum hours,” “research,” and “academic affiliation” as requirements for a fellowship site, with less weight for “coursework” and “other.” Finally, the students valued “improved personal ability to provide exceptional patient care,” “the potential for increased job opportunities,” and the “potential for a higher salary” as benefits most important to them, with lower ratings for “recognition as a subject matter expert” or “potential pathway to Ph.D. program.” Conclusions As a result of the survey, further exploration of a postgraduate specialization fellowship is warranted, especially to determine funding opportunities to offset cost for the sites and to ensure that fellows are paid adequately.

AbstractAs part of the ongoing work by the Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession (CSWP), we offer an empirical analysis of the pipeline problem in academia. The image of a pipeline is a commonly advanced explanation for persistent discrimination that suggests that gender inequality will decline once there are sufficient numbers of qualified women in the hiring pool. The CSWP believes that it is important to ask whether this phenomenon is actually occurring, because the implication is that we can explain inequality as a function of insufficient numbers of trained women in the pool, rather than as a result of ongoing discrimination that requires alternate remedies. Data from the American Association of University Professors suggests that merely increasing the pool of qualified women has not led to a commensurate number of women rising to the top in academia. Women are still ending up in lower paid jobs, and they continue to earn less than men in comparable positions. More aggressive policies to end discrimination are required.

In this interview, Professor Susan Gasser speaks with Storm Johnson, commissioning editor for Epigenomics, on her research on genome stability, epigenetic regulation and chromatin organization, as well as her work supporting women in research. Susan Gasser completed her BA at the University of Chicago, with an honors thesis in biophysics, and her PhD in biochemistry at the University of Basel in 1982, with Gottfried Schatz. She was a postdoc with Ulrich Laemmli at the University of Geneva, which initiated her career-long interest in chromosomes and chromatin structure. She established her own laboratory at the Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research (ISREC) in 1986, focusing on chromatin organization in budding yeast, combining genetics, microscopy and biochemical approaches to understanding silent chromatin and telomeres. In 2001, she was named professor of molecular biology at the University of Geneva and expanded her laboratory's pioneering use of high-resolution time-lapse fluorescence microscopy to study single locus dynamics in the nucleus. From 2004 to 2019, Susan was the Director of the Friedrich Miescher Institute for Biomedical Research in Basel, where she also led a research group until the end of 2020. In Basel, she extended her research interests into heterochromatin in Caenorhabditis elegans. Her laboratory identified the mechanisms that position tissue-specific genes in the nuclei of embryos and of differentiated tissues, combining high throughput molecular analyses with cell biology to determine structure–function relationships in chromatin. Since January 2021, Susan Gasser has been professor invité at the University of Lausanne and Director of the ISREC Foundation, where she is helping shape the new Agora Institute of Translational Cancer Research. She was elected to the Académie de France, Leopoldina, European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO), American Association for the Advancement of Science and Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences, and she received the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM) International Prize in 2011, the Federation of European Biochemical Societies | EMBO Women in Science Award in 2012, the Weizmann Institute Women in Science Award in 2013 and honorary doctorates from the University of Lausanne, the University of Fribourg and Charles University in Prague. In Switzerland, she was the recipient of the Friedrich Miescher Award, the National Latsis Prize and the Otto Naegeli Award for the promotion of medical research. She participates in numerous review boards and advisory committees in Switzerland, across Europe and in Japan; she currently serves on the governing board of the Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology and the Swiss Science Council. From 2000 to 2004, she was vice chairperson, then chairperson of the EMBO Council. Susan led the Gender Committee of the Swiss National Science Foundation from 2014 to 2019 and initiated the Swiss National Science Foundation Prima program for the Promotion of women in academia. She has actively promoted the careers of women scientists in Europe and Japan.

Rokas Bagdonas, Algimantas Tamelis, Rytis Rimdeika, Mindaugas Kiudelis Įvadas / tikslas Didžiausia nudegimų chirurgijos problema yra infekcija, nuo kurios miršta daugiau kaip 50% visų nudegusių pacientų. Nudegimų žaizda greitai infekuojasi, kadangi žaizdos aplinka yra ideali mikroorganizmams atsirasti ir daugintis. Studijoje, patvirtintoje Universiteto etikos komiteto, analizuojami nudegę pacientai ir iš nudegimo žaizdų išskirti patogenai. Pacientai ir metodai Mes analizavome 2246 nudegusius pacientus (amžiaus vidurkis – 27 metai), gydytus KMU Chirurgijos klinikose 1997–2002 metais. Nudegimo sunkumas buvo vertintas pagal Amerikos nudegimų asociacijos (ABA) schemą. 2462 nudegimo žaizdos pasėliai (2246 pacientų) buvo paimti steriliu tamponu ir pasėti 5% kraujo ir MacConkey terpėse. Rezultatai Iš nudegusių pacientų 1447 (74%) buvo vyrai ir 799 (26%) – moterys (p < 0,001). Pacientų amžius – nuo 2 iki 47 metų. 1261 (56%, p < 0,05) pacientai patyrė lengvą, 522 – vidutinį ir 463 – sunkų kūno nudegimą. 2130 pasėliai (86,5%), paimti iš 2462 nudegimo žaizdų, buvo teigiami. Iš 2130 teigiamų pasėlių Staphylococcus aureus išskirtas 1110 (52,1%) pasėliuose, iš jų MRSA – 498 (23,4%). Išvados Jauni vyrai dažniausiai patiria lengvus kūno nudegimus. Nudegimo žaizda dažniausiai infekuojasi S. aureus mikroorganizmais. MRSA yra pagrindinis ligoninės patogenas, infekuojantis nudegimo žaizdą. Prasminiai žodžiai: nudegimo sunkumas, nudegimo žaizdos patogenai, išskirti sukėlėjai Analysis of burn patients and the isolated pathogens Rokas Bagdonas, Algimantas Tamelis, Rytis Rimdeika, Mindaugas KiudelisKaunas Medical University, Clinic of Surgery,Eivenių str. 2, LT-50009, Kaunas, LithuaniaE-mail: rbagdonas@hotmail.com Background / objective The major challenge for a burn team is infection, which is known to cause over 50% of burn deaths. Burns become infected, because the environment at the site of the wound is ideal for the proliferation of infecting organisms. This study, approved by the regional Ethics Committee, analyzes the features of burned patients and the rates of pathogens isolated from burn wounds. Patients and methods We studied 2246 burn patients (mean age 27 years) admitted to the tertiary academic hospital in 1997–2002. The differentiation of the severity of burn injury was based on the scheme of the American Burn Association (ABA). 2462 surface swabs for microbiological analysis were taken from all 2246 patients. The wound area was swabbed with an alginate swab and cultured in 5% blood and MacConkey agar. Results There were 1447 (74%) men and 799 (26%) women (p < 0.001), age range 2–47 years. There were 1261 patients (56%, p < 0.05) with minor, 522 with moderate and 463 with major burn injuries. 2130 swabs (86.5%) out of 2462 burn wound surface swabs were positive. Out of 2130 isolates positive for pathogenic bacterial culture, there were 1110 (52.1%) isolates positive for Staphylococcus aureus infection. The rate of MRSA was 23.4% (498 isolates). Conclusions Young male patients mostly have a minor burn injury. Burn wounds are most commonly infected with S. aureus. MRSA is still the main hospital pathogen in burns. Keywords: severity of the burn injury, burn swabs, isolated pathogens

Abstract Background: Racial and ethnic minorities have well-established disparities in cancer prevention, detection, treatment, and survival. A diverse oncology workforce improves the gap in cancer care for vulnerable populations. However, physicians, researchers, and others who are Underrepresented in Medicine (UIM) face unique challenges in obtaining mentorship and sponsorship, and there is a lack of safe spaces for them to thrive, forcing many to leave medicine entirely. To further efforts in improving the care of vulnerable populations and to create a welcoming environment for UIM medical trainees, the Florez Lab (formerly known as the Duma Lab) was founded by Dr. Narjust Florez in 2019 at the University of Wisconsin. Subsequently, Dr. Florez moved to Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and expanded the lab’s reach. Here, we describe the history and legacy of our innovative group. Methods: The Florez Lab is composed of 39 members, mostly UIM from different backgrounds and locations; members range from college students to faculty. It began as an all-female team but now includes #HeforShe member allies. Several members joined as trainees, but are now junior faculty at NCI designated cancer centers and pay it forward by mentoring the next generation of the Florez Lab. We focus on social justice issues in medicine, including discrimination and gender bias in academic and clinical medicine, global oncology, and cancer health disparities, with a focus on thoracic oncology. Results: To date, the Florez Lab has secured research funding from several institutions and organizations, and has published 15 original articles, 11 editorials, 4 review articles, and 2 book chapters in addition to over 20 poster presentations at national and international conferences. Members have presented research findings at a wide array of national and international conferences, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting and the World Conference on Lung Cancer, and the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting. The lab collaborates with multiple organizations, including the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19), ASCO Health Equity Committee, and the Lancet Commission: Women & Cancer. The lab is far-reaching; the #DumaLab and #FlorezLab hashtag is used on Twitter to amplify published work and advocacy efforts in improving the diversity of the oncology workforce and clinical trial enrollment. In 2021 the Florez Lab began a collaboration with Medscape and is the first lab to have a dedicated column, where we discuss issues related to social justice in medicine and cancer health disparities; the column has reached over 60,000 readers in less than one year. Conclusion: The success of the Florez Lab illustrates the importance of providing opportunities for, supporting, and amplifying the success of UIM trainees. Results indicate that the collaboration of UIM trainees is productive, meaningful, and necessary. Efforts should be made to continue supporting UIM trainees from all backgrounds and levels. Citation Format: Narjust Florez, Inas Abuali, Ana Velazquez, Coral Olazagasti, Idalid Franco, Shruti Patel, Cristiane Bergerot, Paulo Bergerot, Enrique Soto Pérez, Carolina Bernabe-Ramirez, Lauren Kiel. The Florez Lab at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute: Improving the care of vulnerable populations and supporting trainees from underrepresented groups in medicine [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 15th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2022 Sep 16-19; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl):Abstract nr B084.

Background: Missing outcome data in clinical trials are important determinants of internal validity; however, its burden and risk in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) mothers supplemented with vitamin D remain poorly studied. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol is proposed here to study it. Methods: The English language publications, irrespective of its publication date, will be searched in electronic databases for randomized controlled trials studying the above outcome. The eligible trials will undergo the risk of bias assessment by the Cochrane tool. Data on its trial design, population characteristics, interventions compared, and the outcome will be abstracted. The prevalence and incidence (in risk ratio) of missing outcome data will be estimated meta-analytically. The statistical heterogeneity assessment will include the use of Chi2 and I2 statistics. For the explanation of any substantial heterogeneity, a meta-regression analysis will ensue. The statistical significance will be determined at P <0.05 and 95% CI. All analyses will be done in Stata statistical software. If the quantitative analysis is not possible, narrative reporting will happen. Results: The reporting of the review will follow the PRISMA guideline. Statistically significant pairwise meta-analysis finding's grading will occur by the GRADE approach. Conclusion: The proposed review will estimate the prevalence of missing outcome data in vitamin D supplemented GDM mothers in clinical trials and compare its risk with the placebo recipients. PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42020180634 References Quintanilla Rodriguez BS, Mahdy H. Gestational Diabetes. [Updated 2019 Dec 23]. StatPearls. Treasure Isl StatPearls Publ. 2020. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK545196/ Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131: e49–64. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29370047 Mack LR, Tomich PG. Gestational Diabetes: Diagnosis, Classification, and Clinical Care. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am [Internet]. 2017; 44:207–17. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28499531 Coustan DR. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Clin Chem. 2013; 59:1310–21. Available from: http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/doi/10.1373/clinchem.2013.203331 Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2019. Diabetes Care. 2019;42: S165–72. Available from: http://care.diabetesjournals.org/lookup/doi/10.2337/dc19-S014 Saha S. Compliance and barriers to self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review. Int J Health Sci (Qassim).2019;13:44–52. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31123440 Akbari M, Mosazadeh M, Lankarani K, Tabrizi R, Samimi M, Karamali M, et al. The effects of vitamin d supplementation on glucose metabolism and lipid profiles in patients with gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Horm Metab Res.Germany; 2017;49:647–53. Available from: http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0043-115225 Saha S, Saha S. A comparison of the risk of cesarean section in gestational diabetes mellitus patients supplemented antenatally with vitamin D containing supplements versus placebo: A systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blinded randomized controlled trials. J Turkish-German Gynecol Assoc. 2020; 21:201–12. https://dx.doi.org/10.4274%2Fjtgga.galenos.2020.2019.0164 Saha SS, Saha SS. The risk of morbidities in newborns of antenatal vitamin D supplemented gestational diabetes mellitus patients. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). Qassim University; 2020; 14:3–17. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7475207/ Saha S, Saha S. A Comparison of the Changes in Gestational Weight, Body Mass Index, and Serum Vitamin D Level in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Patients Complemented with Vitamin D in Contrast to Those Who Did Not Receive the Supplement: A Protocol for Systematic Review a. Int J Diabetes Metab. S. Karger AG; 2019; 25:74–9. https://doi.org/10.1159/000505269 Mavridis D, White IR. Dealing with missing outcome data in meta‐ Res Synth Methods.2020;11:2–13. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jrsm.1349 Higgins JPT GS (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Cochrane Collab. 2011 [cited 2020 Aug 27]. Available from: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/archive/v5.1/ Asemi Z, Hashemi T, Karamali M, Samimi M, Esmaillzadeh A. Effects of vitamin D supplementation on glucose metabolism, lipid concentrations, inflammation, and oxidative stress in gestational diabetes: a double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr.2013;98:1425–32. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.113.072785 Asemi Z, Karamali M, Esmaillzadeh A. Effects of calcium–vitamin D co-supplementation on glycaemic control, inflammation and oxidative stress in gestational diabetes: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Diabetologia .2014;57:1798–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-014-3293-x Institute of Medicine (US) Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D. Ross AC, Taylor CL, Yaktine AL, Del Valle HB, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. Available from: https://books.google.co.in/books?id=VF2aRQJ6IZ4C Gossman W, Chauhan K, Huecker MR. Vitamin D. StatPearls. 2019. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28722941 Curtis EM, Moon RJ, Harvey NC, Cooper C. Maternal vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy. Br Med Bull. 2018; 126:57–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy010 Knabl J, Vattai A, Ye Y, Jueckstock J, Hutter S, Kainer F, et al. Role of Placental VDR Expression and Function in Common Late Pregnancy Disorders. I Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18(11):2340. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18112340 Yazdchi R, Gargari BP, Asghari-Jafarabadi M, Sahhaf F. Effects of vitamin D supplementation on metabolic indices and hs-CRP levels in gestational diabetes mellitus patients: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Nutr Res Pract. 2016; 10:328. Available from: http://synapse.koreamed.org/DOIx.php?id=10.4162/nrp.2016.10.3.328 Jamilian M, Samimi M, Ebrahimi FA, Hashemi T, Taghizadeh M, Razavi M, et al. The effects of vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acid co-supplementation on glycemic control and lipid concentrations in patients with gestational diabetes. J Clin Lipidol. 2017; 11:459–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacl.2017.01.011 Li Q, Xing B. Vitamin D3-Supplemented Yogurt Drink Improves Insulin Resistance and Lipid Profiles in Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Double Blinded Clinical Trial. Ann Nutr Metab. 2016; 68:285–90. https://doi.org/10.1159/000447433 Karamali M, Bahramimoghadam S, Sharifzadeh F, Asemi Z. Magnesium–zinc–calcium–vitamin D co-supplementation improves glycemic control and markers of cardiometabolic risk in gestational diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2018; 43:565–70. Available from: http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/10.1139/apnm-2017-0521 Hosseinzadeh-Shamsi-Anar M, Mozaffari-Khosravi H, Salami M-A, Hadinedoushan H, Mozayan MR. The efficacy and safety of a high dose of vitamin d in mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Iran J Med Sci. 2012; 37:159–65. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23115447 Saha S. Impact of missingness on clinical trials on the effectiveness of antenatal vitamin D supplementation in gestational diabetes mellitus patients. J Ideas Heal. 2020; 3:138–9. https://doi.org/10.47108/jidhealth.Vol3.Iss1.47 Saha S, Saha S. The variation in participant attrition between prenatal vitamin D supplemented and not supplemented gestational diabetes mellitus patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PROSPERO. 2020. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020180634 Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015; 4:1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016; 5:210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2014;37 Suppl 1: S81-90. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc14-s081 Rossi G, American Diabetes Association. [Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus]. Recenti Prog Med. 2010; 101:274–6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20842952 Nyaga VN, Arbyn M, Aerts M. Metaprop: a Stata command to perform meta-analysis of binomial data. Arch Public Heal. 2014; 72:39. http://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2049-3258-72-39 Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003; 327:557–60. http://www.bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004; 328:1490. http://www.bmj.com/lookup/doi/10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol.2009;62: e1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006

“Research, no matter how ‘good’, is incomplete, until it has been published.”1 In my opinion, otolaryngology residents, fellows and consultants do not lack in research or scholarly capability. However, “the proof of the pudding is (indeed) in the eating,” and scholarly societies are recognized not so much for what goes on within their hallowed halls, but for what are made public outside those walls. Indeed, “publishing” means to make something public.2 And though we may not lack in research, we certainly still lag in publication. I would therefore not be amiss in address the need for PSOHNS fellows, diplomates and trainees to publish, in electronic or hard-copy, in print or other media, including the social media. Because of my background, much of my reflections will deal with writing—but by no means do I mean to limit publication to that of the written word. Why write and publish? “Start Where You Are: Taking Your Place in the History of Scholarship”2 “Similar to others who write (historians and poets), scientists and those involved in research need to write … to leave behind a documented legacy of their accomplishments.”1 Whatever we discover or unearth in the laboratory, clinic or in the field; whether from samples, specimens, subjects, patients or participants; utilizing theoretical or applied instruments, materials and methods; simply “did not happen” unless it is documented and disseminated. In Filipino,“kung hindi nakasulat, hindi nangyari.” How often do we hear comments like “naisip ko na iyan,” or “na-presenta ko na iyan” or even “sinulat ko na iyan” at a scientific meeting where a speaker presents a study. The sad fact of the matter is that many of these colleagues may indeed have had similar thoughts, or delivered previous oral presentations, or even written reports. But because none of these had been properly published, they remain inaccessible to subsequent scholars, and are therefore neither cited nor acknowledged. “While ‘doing’ the research is important, ‘writing’ about why and how it was done, what was found, and what it means is far more important as it serves as a permanent record of scientific work that has been completed and accepted by peers.”1 And writing and publishing are an entirely different ball game from researching alone. Publication, or “making ideas public,” allows “scholars (to) provide each other with the opportunity to build on each other’s contributions, create dialogue (sometimes heated) with one another and join the documented and ongoing history of their field.”2 It is by participating in this “documented and ongoing history” of whatever field we may be in, that we and our specialty society gain international recognition and become internationally competitive. Taking your place in the history of scholarship starts where you are, as an author. Publication involves communication between the author and his or her audience via the written article.3 Unlike public speakers or performing artists, the author’s interaction with the audience is limited by the written and published work. Hence, “a successful researcher is usually a good communicator who has the ability to maximize the transmission of research findings to his or her chosen audience.”1 Setting the Stage: Advantages of Writing and Publication A few may write “for the pleasure derived from the creative activity of writing and intellectual sharing, and the desire to advance knowledge and benefit mankind” and for these individuals, “writing may act as a channel for expressing the joy of scientific discovery, and may even be regarded as a leisurely pursuit.”1 An historical article on Jose Rizal4 that I researched for a year and a half before the occasion of his 150th anniversary and another on the evolution of indirect laryngoscopy5 that I researched for two years are personal examples of these. For most everyone else, there are career, professional, institutional and practical advantages that can be gained from writing and publication.6 As far as career benefits are concerned, “getting published in prestigious, scholarly journals may have the most direct bearing on your appointment, promotion, tenure and advancement within your institution, organization and discipline.”2 The “up or out” situation faced by many young to mid-career academics would have been easily avoided by publishing early. Moreover, publications are the primary basis for promotion and advancement in academe. Professional benefits are just as important. For junior consultants and younger faculty, “having published articles in reputable international journals are a great help when applying for positions in foreign institutions, and when applying for competitive overseas fellowships.”1 As editor of our specialty scholarly journal, I receive numerous urgent requests from postgraduate residents and young diplomates (unaware of the tedious editing and peer review process) to rush-publish research they undertook in training, in fulfillment of publication requirements for overseas positions or fellowships they are applying for. Had they realized this earlier, they would have been much better-prepared. For more established consultants, “gaining recognition as experts in a particular field at regional and international levels leads to invitations to lecture at scientific meetings and refresher courses, and appointments as consultants to external agencies, expert panels and advisory boards, reviewer and editorial boards.”1 Much of my local and international travels are direct offshoots of previous research, lectures and publications. These generate further research and publication opportunities in turn, as track records in research and publication are considered in “applications for, extension of, and further research funding.”1 Closer to home, publication “increases (the) depth of knowledge in a particular subject that complements and hones clinical (practical) skills, and enables better teaching of students, clinical trainees and postgraduates.”1 Indeed, a true professor must have something to profess, and a well-published professor can certainly profess what he or she does more authoritatively. Of course, the practical benefits gained from engaging in the research and publication process cannot be overlooked. The “inherent training gained during the process of manuscript preparation,” the “discipline of performing a thorough literature search, collating and analyzing data and drafting and repeatedly revising the manuscript”1 during the editing and review process, provide undeniable practical benefits to the author. Researchers who have published are much better positioned to evaluate scholarly publications, having themselves experienced the writing, editing and review process. In this era of “information overload” the published researcher can more effectively evaluate and utilize available evidence. Because of institutional benefits, it is in the best interests of our scholarly society to encourage scholarly writing, as “publication in peer-reviewed journals is arguably the most important means to achieve international recognition for an individual, department, hospital, and university.”1 Various international survey and ranking systems place a premium on such publication, explaining why Philippine academic institutions lag behind their counterparts in Asia and the rest of the world. It is also in the best interests of the Philippines that her clinicians, scientists, artists and scholars publish, as “the author’s country, and even the region, may also derive benefit from published work, particularly if it is on a topic of major importance.”1 At least in the medical field, Filipino publications have made their mark, albeit sparsely. The UP College of Medicine and National Health Sciences Journal Acta Medica Philippina is the source of material indelibly inscribed in the world medical map, and we certainly look forward to the Philippine Journal of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery doing the same. The generous research allocation for Fellows and full support for our journal by the PSOHNS Board of Trustees are a step in the right direction, as are the annual awarding of the Outstanding ENT Specialist in Research and Editors’ Pick Outstanding Research Publication. In keeping with international practice, we should accord due public recognition to our excellent Reviewers and Editors at official PSOHNS functions such as Annual Conventions, if but for the recognition they reciprocally bring to the society. The American Academy of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery has journal Editors and Star Reviewers wear special ribbons at their Annual Meeting, and openly campaigns for participants to thank these reviewers for their contribution. On another note, I was elected President 2014-2016 of the Asia Pacific Association of Medical Journal Editors during the recent Joint Meeting of APAME and the Western Pacific Region Index Medicus and Index Medicus of the South East Asia Region of WHO in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia last August 15 – 17, 2014. This is fortuitous as we prepare to host the APAME Convention 2015 and Joint Meeting with WPRIM and IMSEAR at the WHO Western Pacific Region Office, Sofitel Hotel and Philippine International Convention Center from August 24-26, 2015 in conjunction with FORUM 2015. The other officers are: Executive Vice President Prof. Jeong-Wook Seo (Korea), Vice President for Internal Affairs is Prof. Kiichiro Tsutani (Japan), Vice President for External Affairs Prof. Dai Tao (China), Secretary-General Prof. Wilfred Peh (Singapore). The Philippine Journal of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery is now indexed in the HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme of the World Health Organization www.who.int/hinari making us readily available to a multitude of users from developing countries and increasing our accessibility tremendously. Our society and journal can be accessed via http://extranet.who.int/hinari/en/browse_publisher.php?pub=695 In addition, APAMED Central (on which the Philippine Journal of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery is indexed) has been formally ratified for indexing in the worldwidescience.org database during the World Wide Science Alliance annual meeting in Tokyo last October 2014. Henceforth, all articles from Oct 19 2014, including this issue, will be searchable on this database. Finally, I am especially thankful to our President and my friend, Howard M. Enriquez, MD and the PSOHNS Board of Trustees (especially the Scientific Committee Chair and my friend Elmo R. Lago, Jr., MD) for the support given to me, and our journal on my ninth year as Editor-in-Chief.

Background: The Association of American Medical Colleges and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons have incorporated diversity and inclusion as one of their primary goals. Orthopaedic surgery remains the least diverse medical specialty when measured for practicing physicians and trainees. The purpose of this study was to determine the number and distinct types of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) positions within orthopaedic surgery residency programs in the United States. Methods: The Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database was used to obtain a list of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education–accredited orthopaedic surgery residency programs. The following was collected from 193 residency program websites between June 6, 2022, and June 26, 2022: program location, university or community based, allopathic or osteopathic recognition, number of faculty in the orthopaedic department, number of residents per year, diversity-related statements, and diversity-focused faculty positions. Results: Of the 193 programs evaluated, 74 (38.9%) included DEI statements on their website while only 42 (21.8%) had at least one DEI-specific faculty role (e.g., diversity committee, diversity liaison, vice chair for DEI). For 16 (8.3%) programs, the faculty role was nonspecific to the orthopaedic residency program. Nonspecific roles were primarily created by the affiliated school of medicine, but in 4 (2.1%) outlier cases, faculty members assumed DEI roles through a medical center, a graduate medical education program, or a department of surgery. Conclusions: Less than half of orthopaedic surgery residency programs currently advocate for DEI on their associated websites while fewer than 25% have a DEI faculty position. Previous studies have called for a greater number of DEI positions and committees among orthopaedic residencies because of the lower admittance rate of qualified Under Represented in Medicine (URiM) applicants. A role dedicated to DEI may increase the number of women and URiM applicants pursuing a career in orthopaedic surgery.

Abstract Objective Qualifications needed to achieve national leadership positions in hand surgery are poorly defined. This study compares the academic accomplishments, demographics, and training backgrounds of presidents elected to serve the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) and the American Association for Hand Surgery (AAHS). Methods The ASSH and AAHS provided names of elected Presidents (1990–2022, n = 64). Curriculum vitae and academic web sites were used to collect demographic, training, bibliometric, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding data of presidents. Results Presidents were predominately male (95%), Caucasian (90%), and orthopaedic surgery residency-trained (66%). Only 9% were racial minorities (8% Asian, 2% Hispanic, and 0% African American). The average age at appointment was 59 ± 7 years old, which was an average of 23 years from completion of hand surgery fellowship. More presidents received plastic surgery residency training in AAHS than ASSH (50 vs. 19%). The most represented hand surgery fellowships were Mayo Clinic (14%), University of Louisville (11%), and Duke University (9%). Twenty-one presidents participated in a travel fellowship (33%). Thirty presidents served as Department Chair or Division Chief at time of election (47%). The average h-index was 34 ± 18 resulting from 164 ± 160 peer-reviewed manuscripts and was similar between the two organizations. Eleven presidents had NIH grant funding (18%) and there were no differences in procurement or funding totals between the two organizations. Conclusion Presidents of American hand surgery societies obtain high levels of scholarly activity regardless of training specialty. Women and racial minorities remain underrepresented at the highest levels of leadership.

Persistent pain after surgery in breast cancer has a significant impact on the patient’s survival. The value of escalating research on breast cancer in Malaysia cannot be underestimated. However, it is not known how many of these women experience persistent pain after surgery. This study surveyed previously unknown figures on prevalence, and explored the predictive factors of persistent pain women with breast cancer in Malaysia. There were three objectives. First, to assess the reliability of the already established investigative tools, namely, the Brief Pain Inventory, Distress Thermometer, and Resilience scale RS-14; second, to survey the prevalence of persistent pain; and thirdly to identify predictors of persistent pain in women after breast surgery, using the above measures. A test and retest design with no intervention and a recall period of 3 to 7 days was employed for assessment of the investigative tools. A cross-sectional study, with a prospective, correlational design, a retrospective review of medical records was used to identify predictors of persistent pain. These investigations were conducted in two phases –Section A and Section B – using separate data sets, with different inclusion and exclusion criteria. Participants were recruited from the University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. Descriptive statistics, a stepwise regression model for reliability testing, Cronbach alpha, and factor analysis were used. This study divided pain into categories 0 = no pain, 1–4 = mild pain, 5–6 = moderate pain, and 7–10 = severe pain. Section A: The tools were found reliable. Section B: A total of 123 participants were recruited; 119 participants remained because 4 of them did not meet the inclusion criteria. A total of 43% of the participants had persistent pain (n = 51). Pain interfered with their work, mood, and sleep. Based on a “Yes” answer for pain today (n = 51), data were analysed to determine predictors. The results revealed three predictors: distress, B = –.911, resilience, B = –.444, and pain interference, B = .309. The model was statistically significant, F (3, 41, 44) = 13.827, R2 = 0.267, .381, .467), and adjusted R2 = .250, .351, .467, p = 0.001. Significant P value ≤ .005. Pain prevalence was 43% in this Malaysian population. This study provided empirical evidence which is an important new knowledge to health care systems, health care providers, policy makers, and future research. The impact of persistent pain on work, mood, and sleep are justifiable medical concerns. The results obtained and identified predictors are catalysts for providing extra support for breast cancer women after surgery. Ideally, all women with breast cancer should have very good life satisfaction.

By virtue of having graduated from Oberlin College, Mollie Church automatically received a membership invitation to the American Association of University Women. She joined the local chapter when she settled in Washington but let her membership lapse. Decades later, in 1946, with the encouragement of her closest white friend and ally, Janet “Nettie” McKelvey Swift, she tried to rejoin and so desegregate the local affiliate. It took years for the case she and Nettie were making for equality and integration to make its way through the court system as well as into the AAUW’s national constitution. Terrell’s congressional testimony in favor of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) was viewed by AAUW women as too radical. She also faced charges of being a communist sympathizer from liberal AAUW women who were also strongly anti-communist. Red Scare antagonism toward the Soviet Union increased after World War II. Terrell’s work with Paul Robeson and the Council on African Affairs, as well as with the Communist-sponsored Civil Rights Congress (CRC), drew the suspicion of the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC).