Abstract 4364577: Climbing the Academic Ladder in Pediatric Cardiology: Career Advancement, Fulfillment and Challenges - A Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Professional fulfillment, work-life balance and recognition of productivity are central to advancing the specialty. Early signs of burnout among pediatric cardiologists have been reported though the underlying reasons remain unclear. This national survey study aimed to examine career fulfillment, promotion readiness and barriers to academic advancement. Methods: Faculty members at academic pediatric cardiology programs in the US and Canada were invited to participate. Surveys were distributed through division directors, social media, and pediatric cardiology professional networks. Descriptive analyses of the results were performed. Results: Three hundred faculty members completed the survey with majority of the faculty based in the US (99%). Women comprised 56% of the respondents and 99% identified as cisgender. Race distribution included 59% European/White, 26% Asian, 3% Hispanic/LatinX and 1% African/Black. Rank distribution included 3% Instructors, 43% Assistant Professors, 28% Associate Professors and 26% Professors. Tenure track faculty were 16% of the respondents and 76% were full time faculty. 26% of the faculty felt they were either not on track or unsure for promotion. Professional fulfillment was reported as very satisfied or satisfied in 77% of the respondents, while 21% of the faculty were neutral, dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. About one-third (35%) of the faculty had at least one job change quoting compensation, job dissatisfaction, or career advancement as primary reasons. The majority (68%) considered themselves caregiver for a child or an elderly family member with 27% of these respondents not feeling there was adequate caregiver support to fulfill job requirements. Of those who did not have adequate caregiver support, 67% felt limited by current compensation to hire additional support. Of those who considered themselves to be primary caregivers, 67% felt as if their role as caregiver affected their career trajectory. Conclusion: While most academic pediatric cardiologists report job fulfillment, many face uncertainty about their path to promotion and have significant caregiver burdens that impact career trajectories. Institutions must consider policies aimed at providing transparency in promotion requirements as well as implementing solutions, such as equitable compensation, to mitigate caregiver-related strain in an effort to support faculty development, advancement and retention.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".