Training Stage, Program Pedigree, Degree Pathway, and Research Productivity among United States Gastroenterology Fellows

Thomas Stirrat Stirrat; Tiffany Tian; Priyanka Solanky; Soham Apte; Sharikha Shahrin; Michael Flatley; Sridhar Thiru; Shriya Kakde; Priyanka Kanth

doi:10.15403/jgld-6786

Authors

Thomas Stirrat Stirrat Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, USA
Tiffany Tian Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
Priyanka Solanky Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
Soham Apte Kentucky College of Osteopathic Medicine, Pikeville, KY, USA
Sharikha Shahrin Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA
Michael Flatley Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Sridhar Thiru Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
Shriya Kakde Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Priyanka Kanth MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Department of Gastroenterology, Washington DC, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15403/jgld-6786

Keywords:

gastroenterology fellowship, research productivity, graduate medical education, international medical graduates, MD‑PhD

Abstract

Background and Aims: Publications influence selection into competitive gastroenterology fellowships, yet drivers of research productivity among current trainees are not well characterized. We evaluated whether training stage, institutional pedigree, and degree pathway are associated with research output among United States of America gastroenterology fellows.

Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of fellows listed on publicly available rosters from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited adult gastroenterology fellowship programs (October–November 2025). PubMed-indexed publications were identified and categorized by training stage (medical school, residency, fellowship) and gastroenterology (GI)-specificity. Group comparisons used Mann–Whitney U tests. Poisson generalized estimating equation models clustered by program estimated adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for total publication counts.

Results: Among 776 fellows from 125 programs, PGY6 fellows had more GI-specific publications than PGY4 fellows (median 3 vs 2) and greater fellowship-period output. Training in top-ranked environments was associated with higher total and GI-specific publication counts, with the largest differences observed for top 20 fellowship environments. In adjusted analyses, top-ranked training affiliations remained independently associated with higher total publication output. Women had approximately 15% lower total publication output than men (adjusted IRR ≈0.85). International medical graduates had higher publication counts than non-IMGs, whereas U.S. DO graduates had lower counts.

Conclusions: Research productivity among United States of America gastroenterology fellows varies by training stage, training environment, and degree pathway, likely reflecting opportunity and infrastructure as well as individual aptitude.