Scholarly Activity during Neonatal–Perinatal Medicine Fellowship

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to describe scholarly activity training during neonatal–perinatal medicine (NPM) fellowship and factors associated with scholarship productivity. Study Design NPM fellowship program directors (FPDs) were surveyed between March and October 2019, as part of a larger study of all pediatric subspecialty programs, to define barriers, resources, and productivity for fellow scholarly activity. High productivity was defined as >75% of fellows in a program in the last 5 years having a manuscript accepted for publication based on fellowship scholarly work. Results Fifty-four percent (54/100) of NPM FPDs completed the survey. Nineteen fellowship programs (35%, 19/54) met the definition for high productivity. High productivity in scholarly activity was associated with a greater likelihood of having funds to conduct scholarship (p = 0.011), more protected months dedicated to scholarly activity (p = 0.03), and fellow extramural grant applications (submitted or accepted, p = 0.047). FPDs of productive programs were less likely to report lack of an adequate core research curriculum (p = 0.018), lack of adequate expertise on the fellowship scholarly oversight committee (p = 0.048), and lack of sufficient divisional mentorship (p = 0.048) as barriers to completion of scholarly activity during fellowship. Conclusion Research funding, protected research time, established research mentors, and a research curriculum are associated with higher scholarly activity productivity among NPM fellowship programs. Further investment in these resources may improve scholarly activity productivity during fellowship training. Key Points