Scholarly Productivity Among Educators in Radiologic Sciences and Other Health Care Professions: A Comparative Approach

Abstract

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.

Keywords: dental hygiene; educators; medical imaging; medical laboratory science; nursing; radiation therapy; respiratory care; scholarly productivity; scholarship.