Identification of Factors that May Predict Career Trajectory Among Neuro-Ophthalmology Fellows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is modest literature regarding fellowship applicant factors that may predict future career achievement. We aim to characterize neuro-ophthalmology fellows and identify and analyze characteristics that may predict future career trajectory. METHODS: Data, including demographic information, academic background, scholarly activities, and practice information, were collected using publicly available sources, on individuals who completed neuro-ophthalmology fellowships from 2015 to 2021. Summary statistics describing the cohort were calculated. Prefellowship characteristics were compared with postfellowship characteristics to evaluate which prefellowship characteristics may predict postfellowship academic productivity and career achievement. RESULTS: Data were collected on 174 individuals (41.6% men, 58.4% women). Sixty-five percent were residency-trained in ophthalmology, 31% neurology, 1.7% both, and 1.7% pediatric neurology. Fifty-eight percent completed residency in the US, 8% in Canada, 32% internationally, and 2% in multiple locations. Among those practicing in the US/Canada, 63.8% practice at academic centers, 35.3% private practice, and 0.9% at both. Thirty-one percent completed additional subspecialty training and 17.8% additional graduate degrees. Completion of additional fellowship training or graduate degrees, and publication of more papers before fellowship, correlated with later academic productivity. There were no significant correlations between completion of an additional fellowship or graduate degree with current practice environment or attainment of leadership roles. There were no significant correlations between total publishing productivity prefellowship and practice environment or leadership roles postfellowship. CONCLUSIONS: Additional graduate degrees/subspecialty training, and prefellowship academic productivity, correlated with later academic productivity among neuro-ophthalmologists, suggesting that these metrics may be helpful in predicting future academic performance among fellowship applicants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".