TY - JOUR
T1 - Scholarly Productivity Among Educators in Radiologic Sciences and Other Health Care Professions
T2 - A Comparative Approach
AU - Clark, Kevin R.
AU - Webster, Tammy L.
N1 - Funding Information:
Using a mixed-methods approach, educators from dental hygiene, medical imaging and radiation therapy, medical laboratory science, nursing, and respiratory care were surveyed to compare their engagement in various scholarly activities, including: ƒ writing profession-related books and book chapters ƒ presenting at national and international conferences ƒ publishing peer-reviewed journal articles and abstracts ƒ writing grant proposals The educator participants were asked to rank motivators and barriers associated with scholarly productivity and identify whether employer support measures or resources were available to assist in their scholarship practices. A research grant was obtained through the ASRT Foundation to fund this study. Ethics approval to conduct this study was granted through the institutional review boards from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (PA19-0458) and the University of Nebraska Medical Center (IRB #085-19-EX). The guiding research questions for this study were: ƒ How do scholarship practices of medical imaging and radiation therapy educators compare to den-tal hygiene, medical laboratory science, nursing, and respiratory care educators?
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020. American Society of Radiologic Technologists. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2020/11/1
Y1 - 2020/11/1
N2 - Purpose To compare scholarly productivity among dental hygiene, medical imaging and radiation therapy, medical laboratory science, nursing, and respiratory care educators. Methods Using a mixed-methods approach, educators were surveyed to compare their engagement in scholarly activities and identify motivators, employer support measures, and barriers associated with scholarship engagement. Quantitative data were analyzed using percentages, descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis H tests, and Welch F tests. Thematic analyses were performed on the qualitative responses. Results Of the 360 completed surveys, 295 (81.9%) participants indicated that they engaged in scholarly activities. Medical laboratory science educators wrote significantly more peer-reviewed journal articles than did medical imaging and radiation therapy educators (P = .004). Medical laboratory science educators ranked career advancement as a significantly higher motivator than did nursing educators (P = .045); nursing educators ranked personal satisfaction as a significantly higher motivator than did educators from respiratory care (P = .002) and medical laboratory science (P = .009); and medical laboratory science educators ranked pressure from institution hierarchy as a significantly higher motivator than did dental hygiene educators (P = .005) and medical imaging and radiation therapy educators (P = .043). Thematic analyses revealed that participants consider collaboration to be a motivating factor to engage in scholarship; employer support measures should include guidance with grant writing and funding; and barriers that limit productivity include a lack of time, program faculty, and understanding where to begin. Discussion Initiatives such as mentoring programs should be implemented to promote collaborative efforts among medical imaging and radiation therapy educators to increase productivity in scholarship, particularly in peer-reviewed publications, and minimize potential barriers. In addition, the ASRT Foundation created new grant tiers for radiologic technologists and radiation therapists who have an interest in conducting research and publishing their results. This opportunity can advance scholarly productivity in the profession. Conclusion Communicating the value of scholarship engagement to medical imaging and radiation therapy educators is important so that the profession can advance to its full potential as a distinct allied health profession.
AB - Purpose To compare scholarly productivity among dental hygiene, medical imaging and radiation therapy, medical laboratory science, nursing, and respiratory care educators. Methods Using a mixed-methods approach, educators were surveyed to compare their engagement in scholarly activities and identify motivators, employer support measures, and barriers associated with scholarship engagement. Quantitative data were analyzed using percentages, descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis H tests, and Welch F tests. Thematic analyses were performed on the qualitative responses. Results Of the 360 completed surveys, 295 (81.9%) participants indicated that they engaged in scholarly activities. Medical laboratory science educators wrote significantly more peer-reviewed journal articles than did medical imaging and radiation therapy educators (P = .004). Medical laboratory science educators ranked career advancement as a significantly higher motivator than did nursing educators (P = .045); nursing educators ranked personal satisfaction as a significantly higher motivator than did educators from respiratory care (P = .002) and medical laboratory science (P = .009); and medical laboratory science educators ranked pressure from institution hierarchy as a significantly higher motivator than did dental hygiene educators (P = .005) and medical imaging and radiation therapy educators (P = .043). Thematic analyses revealed that participants consider collaboration to be a motivating factor to engage in scholarship; employer support measures should include guidance with grant writing and funding; and barriers that limit productivity include a lack of time, program faculty, and understanding where to begin. Discussion Initiatives such as mentoring programs should be implemented to promote collaborative efforts among medical imaging and radiation therapy educators to increase productivity in scholarship, particularly in peer-reviewed publications, and minimize potential barriers. In addition, the ASRT Foundation created new grant tiers for radiologic technologists and radiation therapists who have an interest in conducting research and publishing their results. This opportunity can advance scholarly productivity in the profession. Conclusion Communicating the value of scholarship engagement to medical imaging and radiation therapy educators is important so that the profession can advance to its full potential as a distinct allied health profession.
KW - dental hygiene
KW - educators
KW - medical imaging
KW - medical laboratory science
KW - nursing
KW - radiation therapy
KW - respiratory care
KW - scholarly productivity
KW - scholarship
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096348538&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85096348538&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 33203768
AN - SCOPUS:85096348538
SN - 0033-8397
VL - 92
SP - 113
EP - 125
JO - Radiologic technology
JF - Radiologic technology
IS - 2
ER -