{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019218025182239893, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011928429423459244, 'mean_word_length': 5.741071428571429, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Specialty Specific Comparisons Regarding Perspectives on Fellowship Training

BACKGROUND: As part of a recent effort by the American Board of Pediatrics to examine fellowship training, a task force was established to review the components of training and develop recommendations for any modifications deemed necessary. To inform the task force, several studies were undertaken to gain insights and perspectives from current fellows, those who had completed fellowship training, and program directors regarding their experiences and the perceived value of their training. This article provides the findings for each subspecialty in tables that allow comparison with all other subspecialties for each study population. METHODS: All data were first analyzed for missing or incomplete response patterns. Frequency distributions of all findings were prepared for each specific subspecialty. Next, χ2 statistics were used to compare each subspecialty with the others. A P value <.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Results for each question for each study population are shown in the tables, provided in the online data supplement. Supplemental Tables 1–29 are for program directors, Supplemental Tables 30–48 are for current fellows, Supplemental Tables 49–76 are for recent fellowship graduates, and Supplemental Tables 77–99 are for midcareer subspecialists. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences between the subspecialties in their perceptions of a variety of issues involving fellowship training.