Interventions to increase research publications in graduate medical education trainees: a systematic review

Introducing trainees to research using an online, asynchronous course

Introduction

Research is an important aspect of many students' training. However, formal research training is rarely included in curricula. Thus, we developed an online, asynchronous series of modules to introduce trainees to multiple topics that are relevant to the conduct of research.

Methods

Research 101 was utilized by first-year medical students and undergraduate students conducting mentored research projects. Students' knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction were assessed using pre- and post-module surveys with five-point Likert scaled questions, open-ended text responses, and a final quiz.

Results

Pre-module survey results showed that learners felt most confident with the Conducting a literature search and Race and racism in medicine modules and least confident with the Submitting an Institutional Review Board protocol at UC module. Post-module survey responses were significantly increased compared to pre-module results for all modules and questions (p < 0.0001). The response to "The content of this module met my needs" was endorsed across all modules (84.9% "yes" responses). A final quiz of 25 multiple-choice questions was completed by 92 participants who received a median score of 21. Content analysis of open-ended post-module survey responses identified several strengths and opportunities for improvement in course content and instructional methods.

Conclusions

These data demonstrate that significant learning resulted from completion of Research 101, as post-module survey scores were significantly higher than pre-module survey scores for all modules and questions. Final quiz scores were positive but also highlighted opportunity for additional trainee learning and will guide evolution of future modules.

Gender Disparity in Earliest Phase of Academic Surgical Training: An Area for Intervention

BACKGROUND

To overcome persistent gender disparities in academic surgery, it is critical to examine the earliest phase of surgical training. This national study sought to assess whether gender disparities also existed among surgical interns, as a proxy for medical school research experience in both quantity and quality.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the 2021 to 2022 public information of 1,493 US-graduated categorical general surgery interns, a bibliometric evaluation was conducted to assess medical school research experience. Multivariable linear regressions with response log-transformed were performed to evaluate the impact of intern gender on (1) total number of peer-reviewed publications, (2) total impact factor (TIF), and (3) adjusted TIF based on authorship placement (aTIF). Back-transformed estimates were presented.

RESULTS

Of these interns, 52.3% were female. Significant differences were observed in TIF (male 6.4 vs female 5.3, p = 0.029), aTIF (male 10.8 vs female 8.7, p = 0.035), gender concordance with senior authors (male 79.9% vs female 34.1%, p < 0.001), Hirsch index (male 21.0 vs female 18.0, p = 0.026), and the geographic region of their medical schools (p = 0.036). Multivariable linear regressions revealed that female interns were associated with lower TIF (0.858, p = 0.033) and aTIF (0.851, p = 0.044). Due to a significant gender-by-region interaction, adjusted pairwise comparisons showed that male interns in the Northeast had approximately 70% higher TIF (1.708, p = 0.003) and aTIF (1.697, p = 0.013) than female interns in the South.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender disparities existed in the quality of research experience in the earliest phase of surgical training. These timely results call for additional interventions by the stakeholders of graduate medical education.

Creating a Resident Research Track in Synergy With the Rehabilitation Medicine Scientist Training Program

ABSTRACT

Physician scientists play an important role in the translation of research findings to patient care; however, their training faces numerous challenges. Residency research track programs represent an opportunity to facilitate the training of future physician scientists in physical medicine and rehabilitation, although optimal program organization and long-term outcomes remain unknown. The Rehabilitation Medicine Scientist Training Program is a National Institutes of Health-funded program aimed at addressing the shortage of physician researchers in the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation by providing instruction, mentorship, and networking opportunities for a successful research career. While the opportunities provided through the Rehabilitation Medicine Scientist Training Program provide critical education and guidance at a national level, trainees are most successful with availability of strong local support and mentorship. The purpose of this article was to present a realistic and easily applicable structure for a physical medicine and rehabilitation residency research track that can be used in concert with the Rehabilitation Medicine Scientist Training Program.

The content expert program: A structured approach to increase emergency medicine resident scholarly activity

Objectives

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires residents to participate in scholarship and requires residency programs to provide an environment within which residents can acquire skills related to scholarly activities. However, consensus on the definition of scholarship and structure of program environments does not yet exist. We designed and implemented a content expert program (CEP) in 2015, in which each resident worked with a faculty advisor to develop a longitudinal scholarly activity linked to a core area of practice and, in doing so, became the department's "content expert." We hypothesized that the CEP would significantly increase the number of scholarly outputs per resident.

Methods

The CEP was structured around an oversight committee composed of key faculty members, which guided development of CEP projects through regular meetings and formative feedback. Each resident generated one or more scholarly outputs from their content area. Outputs were categorized into educational, operational, research, and miscellaneous domains and further identified as intradepartmental, interdepartmental, or interdisciplinary collaborations. The number of outputs was compared to the baseline number of scholarly activities per resident at the study program using a Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

A total of 187 scholarly outputs were generated by 76 residents, which equated to 31.2 outputs per year, or 2.5 outputs per resident. This was a significant increase compared to the program baseline of one output per resident (p = 0.003). Eighteen distinct types of outputs spanned four major categories. Of the outputs, 37 were interdepartmental, 42 were interdisciplinary, and 32 were intradepartmental.

Conclusions

The CEP proved to be a sustainable way to significantly increase scholarly activity and additionally improved collaborative efforts. With the appropriate structure and willing faculty in place, such a program can enhance the practical education provided by residency programs.

A 20-Year Analysis of Global Authorship Trends in Craniofacial Literature: Is the United States Falling Behind?

INTRODUCTION

Recent advances in craniofacial surgery have occurred in conjunction with a global proliferation of research. Although previous studies have examined geographic publication trends, little is known about these trends in the craniofacial literature.

METHODS

All craniofacial articles published from 2000 to 2020 in 3 premier craniofacial surgery journals were evaluated in 5-year increments. Geographic origin, manuscript type, and authorship characteristics were collected. Changes in publication output, geographic origin, and content were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total 3864 articles were analyzed, with the United States (U.S.) (33.46%) accounting for the majority, followed by Asia (27.04%), the Middle East (16.23%), and Europe (14.65%). The proportion of articles from the U.S. decreased significantly in the in the 20-year span (48.28% versus 33.53%, P < 0.001), whereas those originating from Asia and the Middle East increased significantly (18.62% versus 31.41% and 10.34% versus 15.66%, respectively, P < 0.001). After stratifying and selecting for regions with the greatest changes in publication output, the authors observed significant trends for the number of original investigations from 2000 to 2020 in the U.S. (Odds Ratio [OR] 1 versus 2.4, P < 0.001) and in Asia (OR 1 versus 1.8, P = 0.0052). Additionally, a significant trend in editorial/correspondence publications originating in the U.S. (OR 1 versus 0.74, P = 0.0102), Europe (OR 1 versus 0.38, P = 0.0186), and Asia (OR 1 versus 0.48, P = 0.0051) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite rising craniofacial publications over the past 2 decades, there has been a diminishing proportion originating from the U.S.

Determinants of research productivity during postgraduate medical education: a structured review

BACKGROUND

Although formal participation in research is an integral and often mandatory component of clinical training programs, resulting productivity is highly variable. The objective of this review was to identify determinants of successful research performance among graduate medical education trainees.

METHODS

A structured review of the published literature was performed by searching PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE from inception through to 7 April, 2021. Articles examining graduate medical education trainee research productivity evidenced by publications in peer-reviewed journals were included.

RESULTS

Eighty-five articles were included of which most (66; 78%) were reported from the USA or Canada (10; 12%). A wide range of disciplines were represented with the most common being general surgery, internal medicine, orthopedic surgery, and pediatrics. Themes (number of reports) included trainee characteristics (n = 24), project characteristics (n = 8), mentoring/supervision (n = 11), and programmatic aspects (n = 57). Although variable results were observed, research productivity tended to be higher with prior research experience, later years of training, male gender, and pursuit of a postgraduate degree. Few project related aspects of success were identified. Trainee publication was associated with mentors with higher rank, publication productivity, and supportive academic environments. Training programs with organised programs/curricula including protection of time for research were associated with increased productivity as were provision of incentives or rewards but not mandatory requirements.

CONCLUSION

This review identifies several trainee characteristics, project and mentor aspects, and programmatic aspects associated with increased productivity that may serve as a useful resource for trainees and graduate medical education training programs.

Benefits of developing graduate medical education programs in community health systems

The creation of new CMS-funded Graduate Medical Education (GME) cap positions by the Consolidated Appropriations Act 2021 offers a unique opportunity for systems in community and rural settings to develop and expand their training programs. This article provides a review of the evidence behind the value proposition for system administrators to foster the growth of GME in community health systems. The infrastructure needed to accredit GME programs may reduce the cost of care for both the patients and the system through improved patient outcomes and facilitation of system efforts to recognize and mitigate social determinants of health. Residents, fellows and medical students expand the capacity of the current healthcare workforce of a system by providing coverage during healthcare emergencies and staffing services in difficult-to-recruit specialties. Those trainees are the nucleus of succession planning for the current medical staff, can facilitate the creation and expansion of service lines, and may elevate the profile of the system through scholarly work and equity and quality improvement activities. While creating GME programs in a community health system may, at first glance, be perceived as cost-prohibitive, there are robust advantages to a system for their creation.

Practical guidance to advisors of residents on the fellowship selection process

Inability to Match into a fellowship is usually not a reflection of some failure on the part of the resident, but rather a problem of supply and demand. Understanding how to advise residents to maximize their success in an environment with limited spots and limited fellowship faculty resources to perform holistic review remains one of the primary objectives of most residency mentors. Residents can alter the odds in their favor by engaging with local faculty and in national society mentorship programs, performing ‘enough’ research, building their ‘brand,’ and concentrating on high quality personal statements.

Podiatric Medicine and Surgery Resident-Authored Publications in The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery: A Systematic Review

Since its introduction into the medical community, the Podiatric Medicine and Surgery residency has strived to graduate the most advanced and learned foot and ankle surgeons. From increasing length of training, to assuring didactics and education are sufficiently incorporated into the residency, the Council on Podiatric Medical Education has overseen this transition. One area of interest, podiatric medicine and research, remains central to this training and contributes to the field of foot and ankle surgery through journal publications. The purpose of this review was to identify Podiatric Medicine and Surgery resident-authored publication rates, trends, and geographic distribution. All published case reports, original research articles, review articles, and tips, quips, and pearls in The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery from January 2009 to December 2018 were reviewed. Podiatric Medicine and Surgery residents comprised 8% of all authors. Residents contributed to and published as first authors in 22% and 11% of all manuscripts, respectively. An increasing trend in resident authors, resident-authored manuscripts, and resident-first-authored manuscripts was observed. From before the mandated 3-year residency to after, the proportion of resident-authored manuscripts to all manuscripts declined from 9.99% to 7.21%; however, among these resident-authored publications, the rate of first-authorship increased from 45.32% to 51.36%. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first and only study to examine publication rates among foot and ankle surgery residents.

The Effect of a Points System on Incentivizing Academic Behaviors of Attending Ophthalmologists

(1) Background: Little is known regarding the best ways to promote academic throughput within the ranks of attending ophthalmology physicians. The purpose of this project is to evaluate the effect of a monetized points system on incentivizing research output and other academic activity in academic ophthalmology attendings. (2) Methods: This is a retrospective study of 15 academic ophthalmology attendings at a single academic teaching hospital from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2020. A points system was implemented in the 2017 academic year (1 July 2016–30 June 2017), in which ophthalmology attendings accrued points for eight categories of academic achievement. We compared the overall number of publications, number of first/senior author publications, and corresponding impact factors of journals via the PubMed database in the two years of data before and after the points system was implemented. We analyzed points awarded for eight categories of academic achievement in the first, second, and third year of the program. (3) Results: There was no significant change in research productivity for attending ophthalmologists after institution of the points system. From 2017 to 2019, Mann–Whitney analysis revealed a significant increase in points awarded for mentorship per physician (p = 0.013). (4) Conclusions: Our data suggest that within the framework of the points system, attendings—rather than prioritizing publications—gravitated towards mentorship activities to accrue points.

Building a Culture of Scholarship Within a Family Medicine Department: a Successful Eight-Year Journey of Incremental Interventions Following a Historical Perspective of Family Medicine Research

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Family medicine (FM), a discipline that eschewed worshiping the ivory tower of research in favor of patient care, has struggled with its role in the world of scholarly activity. FM residencies mirror this conflict despite the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's requirements for creating an environment of inquiry and scholarship. Because of this, the faculty within the Department of Family and Community Health (dFCH) at Marshall University changed its culture of scholarship.

METHODS

A faculty-driven needs-based assessment of the department's strengths and deficiencies for enhancing scholarship was conducted. A three-pronged approach of creating motivation, developing an infrastructure, and consolidating resources was created. This process was periodically re-evaluated and augmented. Departmental scholarly activity, defined as both publications and presentations, was tracked for an eight year period.

RESULTS

Scholarly output increased by 483% (6 to 29) in year 1 and 10-fold by year 8 (6 to 60) from the pre-culture change baseline. This represents one- and eight-year increases for both publications (4 to 6 and 4 to 18 respectively) and presentations (2 to 23 and 2 to 42 respectively). Scholarly involvement became more widespread among faculty (n = 30) and increased linearly for residents (n = 19) and students (n = 13).

CONCLUSION

Through a series of needs-based interventions with consistent reanalysis, the dFCH changed its culture of scholarship. Understanding that other departments have similar competing interests to negotiate, the principles of creating motivation, developing research infrastructure, and consolidating resources could be successfully applied elsewhere.

Medical Student Research in Surgery: From Abstract Presentation to Publication

OBJECTIVE

Early career mentorship in surgical research often begins in medical school, and scholarly activity in the forms of abstract presentations and publications is seen as a critical criterion in residency applications. The goal of this study was to examine how often medical student abstract presentations at the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Clinical Congress are eventually published as peer-reviewed publications.

DESIGN

Medical student abstract presentations from ACS Clinical Congress 2014 to 2018 were reviewed. Abstract information was cross-referenced for companion peer-reviewed publication in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases.

RESULTS

In total, 219 students presented abstracts at the ACS Clinical Congress between 2014 and 2018. Of these, 101 (46%) led to publications in 61 different journals. The percentage of presentations that were published was 63% from 2014, 51% from 2015, 56% from 2016, 39% from 2017, and 25% from 2018. Medical students were named as first authors on 54%, second authors on 19%, and third authors on 13% of publications. The basic science presentation category had the greatest conversion to publications (54%), followed by clinical research (48%) and outcomes (45%).

CONCLUSIONS

Forty-six percent of medical student abstract presentations at the ACS Clinical Congress were converted to peer-reviewed publications. While it is encouraging that the ACS Clinical Congress is a productive forum to showcase medical student scholarly activity, more can be done to encourage full translation of research activity to peer-reviewed work. Further studies should be performed to look at influential factors amongst medical students, faculty mentors, and medical schools.