Gynecologic Oncology Reports (Dec 2024)

Global distribution and career outcomes of international fellows trained in Canadian gynecologic oncology programs

  • Omar Touhami,
  • Lara De Guerke,
  • Ly-Ann Teo Fortin,
  • Justin Foo,
  • Diane Provencher,
  • Vanessa Samouelian,
  • Beatrice Cormier,
  • Susie Lau,
  • Shannon Salvador,
  • Walter Gotlieb,
  • Lucy Gilbert,
  • Stephane Laframboise,
  • Alon D Altman,
  • Prafull Ghatage,
  • Harinder Brar,
  • Janice Kwon,
  • Tien Le,
  • Alexandra Sebastianelli,
  • Joel Fokom Domgue,
  • Marie Plante

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 56
p. 101512

Abstract

Read online

Objective: We assessed the global distribution and academic, administrative and research outcomes of international fellows (IFs) trained in Canadian gynecologic oncology (GO) programs. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to IFs who completed GO training in Canada. Using the Web of science database, we identified the publication list, citation record and H-index of IFs and classified them according to their region of practice: high-income countries (HIC), middle income countries (MIC), and low-income countries (LIC). Results: From 1996 to 2020, 81 IFs from 23 countries were trained in English-speaking (62,9%) and French-speaking Canadian universities (37,1%). Most IFs came from HIC (87,6%) and none from LIC. Only 12 IFs (14,8%) are now practicing in Canada. Of the 55 IFs who completed the survey (response rate: 67,9%), the majority (58,2%) reported working in an academic hospital and 29,1% were holding an executive position in a national scholar organization. IFs participated in mentoring residents (96.4 %) and medical students (83,6%) and 36,3% initiated a GO fellowship program in their home country. 67,3% of IFs were involved in international research collaboration and 52,7% participated in international clinical trials. The mean number of publications (22,36 vs 7,75, p = 0.007), citations (369,15 vs 45,12 p = 0.0006) and H-Index (6,88 vs 2,37 p = 0.0001) were significantly higher among IFs working in HIC compared to those in MIC. Most IFs (98,2%) recommended their Canadian GO fellowship program to a colleague from their home country. Conclusion: Most IFs trained in Canadian GO fellowship programs returned to their home countries and achieved important milestones in terms of academic, clinical and research accomplishments.

Keywords