Research Training Among Pediatric Residency Programs

Abstract

Purpose The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) states that “residents should participate in scholarly activity.” However, there is little guidance for effectively integrating scholarly activity into residency. This study was conducted to understand how pediatric residency programs are meeting ACGME requirements and to identify characteristics of successful programs. Methods The authors conducted an on-line cross-sectional survey of all pediatric residency program directors in October 2012, assessing program characteristics, resident participation in scholarly activity, program infrastructure, barriers, and outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify characteristics of programs in the top quartile for resident scholarly activity participation. Results The response rate was 52.8% (105/199 programs). 78.6% (n=77) of programs required scholarly activity, although definitions were variable. When including only original research, systematic reviews or meta-analyses, and case reports or series with references, resident participation averaged 56% (range 0–100%). Characteristics associated with high participation programs included: 1) a scholarly activity requirement (odds ratio (OR) =5.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03–30.0); 2) program director belief that all residents should present work regionally or nationally (OR=4.7, 95% CI 1.5–15.1); and 3) mentorship by >25% of faculty (OR=3.6, CI 1.2–11.4). Only 47.1% (n=41) of program directors were satisfied with resident participation and only 30.7% (n=27) were satisfied with the quality of research training provided. Conclusions The results suggest resident scholarly activity experience is highly variable and suboptimal. Identifying characteristics of successful programs can improve the resident research training experience.

Teaching Lifelong Research Skills in Residency: Implementation and Outcome of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Course

“…19,23 Although the majority of programs report having some infrastructure to provide a research training experience, many report low levels of research knowledge (eg, research design, manuscript writing, and grant writing). 24 To bridge this gap, it is critical that residency programs provide research training experiences that are educationally meaningful, and sustainable within the existing training framework.…”

Scholarly Activity Training during Residency: Ensuring a Meaningful Experience for All Graduates

“…Comparatively, a 2014 national pediatric program director survey found that, on average, 13% of residents per program present their scholarly work at a national or international meeting, and 8% publish. 8 Most residents presenting nationally present at the Pediatric Academic Society meeting. However, multiple residents have also presented their work at subspecialty meetings such as the Society of Critical Care Medicine meeting, the Annual Society of Hematology Meeting, the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition meeting, and the Association of Pediatric Program Directors meeting.…”

Residents’ scholarly activity

“…Yang et al have suggested that the likelihood of the future academic carrier is positively correlated with the scholarly activity performed during residency by urology residents [11]. In an online cross-sectional survey of all pediatric residency program directors in the USA, Abramson et al [13] found that 78.6% of the programs required scholarly activity and 56% of residents participated in research activity, and that only 47.1% of program directors were satisfied with resident participation and only 30.7% were satisfied with the quality of research training provided. These urologists published a mean total of 3.5 and a mean of 2.0 first author studies cited in PubMed during their residency training.…”