Meinzen‐Derr, Jareen K.

AbstractThe role of collaborative biostatisticians and epidemiologists in academic medical centres and how their degree type, supervisor type and sex influences recognition and feelings of respect is poorly understood. We conducted a cross‐sectional survey of self‐identified biostatisticians and epidemiologists working in academic medical centres in the United States or Canada. The survey was sent to 341 contacts at 125 institutions who were asked to forward the survey invitation to faculty and staff at their institution and posted on Community sections of the American Statistical Association website. Participants were asked a variety of questions including if they felt pressured to produce specific results, whether they had intellectual and ethical freedom to pursue appropriate use of statistical methods in collaborative research and if they felt their contributions were appropriately recognized by collaborators. We received responses from 314 biostatisticians or related methodologists. A majority were female (59%), had a doctorate degree (52%) and reported to a statistician or biostatistician supervisor (69%). Overall, most participants felt valued by their collaborators, but that they did not have sufficient calendar time to meet deadlines. Doctoral‐level participants reported more autonomy in their collaborations than master's level participants. Females were less likely to feel recognized and respected compared with males. The survey results suggest that while most respondents felt valued by their collaborators, they have too many projects and need more time to critically review research. Further research is needed to understand why response differs by sex and how these responses fluctuate over time.

Objectives/HypothesisOver the past decade, thoracic slide tracheoplasty (TST) has become the principal operation in the management of congenital tracheal stenosis. The purpose of this report was to describe our experience with revision TST following unsuccessful prior tracheal reconstruction.Study DesignRetrospective analysis at an academic children's hospital.MethodsPatients undergoing TST on cardiopulmonary bypass between January 2005 and May 2014 were reviewed. Patients with a history of prior airway surgery were extracted for further analysis. Preoperative patient variables and postoperative outcomes were evaluated and compared between patients undergoing revision slide tracheoplasty (RTST) and a control group of 26 matched patients undergoing primary surgery TST.ResultsTwenty‐six revision patients (25 referrals, one primary patient) of 162 patients reviewed over the study period met inclusion criteria. Twenty‐three patients had a history of complete tracheal rings, and three patients had cartilaginous deficiency. A total of 41 airway reconstruction procedures had been performed prior to RTST. When compared to primary TST, patients undergoing RTST required fewer cardiac procedures intraoperatively, and fewer mean ventilator hours (P = .01) postoperatively. There was no significant difference in the median length of stay, requirement of >48 hours ventilation, or postoperative complications between groups. There was one nonsurgical postoperative mortality following RTST.ConclusionsDespite some differences in the postoperative management when compared to nonrevision cases, revision TST can be successfully performed after prior tracheal reconstruction with good postoperative outcomes.Level of Evidence4. Laryngoscope, 128:2181–2186, 2018