Research waste is still a scandal—especially in medical students

Sharp, Elliott; Curlewis, Keegan

doi:10.1136/bmj.l700

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Anecdotally at least, academics and medical students are working longer hours to accommodate the demands of research and publishing 56. Critics of higher education have long complained that research is being pushed to the margins by teaching and administrative tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working 9 to 5, not the way to make an academic living: observational analysis of manuscript and peer review submissions over time

Barnett

Mewburn

Schroter³

2019

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo determine whether researchers are submitting manuscripts and peer reviews to BMJ journals out of hours and whether this has changed over time.DesignObservational study of research manuscripts and peer reviews submitted between 2012 and 2019 for which an author’s address could be geocoded.SettingOnline BMJ submission systems for two large general medical journals.Main outcome measuresManuscript and peer review submissions on weekends, on national holidays, and by hour of day (to determine early mornings and late nights). Logistic regression was used to estimate the probability of manuscript and peer review submissions on weekends or holidays.ResultsThe analyses included more than 49 000 manuscript submissions and 76 000 peer reviews. Little change over time was seen in the average probability of manuscript or peer review submissions occurring on weekends or holidays. The levels of out of hours work were high, with average probabilities of 0.14 to 0.18 for work on the weekends and 0.08 to 0.13 for work on holidays compared with days in the same week. Clear and consistent differences were seen between countries. Chinese researchers most often worked at weekends and at midnight, whereas researchers in Scandinavian countries were among the most likely to submit during the week and the middle of the day.ConclusionThe differences between countries that are persistent over time show that a “culture of overwork” is a literal thing, not just a figure of speech.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working 9 to 5, not the way to make an academic living: observational analysis of manuscript and peer review submissions over time

Barnett

Mewburn

Schroter³

2019

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our local trainees have described their feelings of lack of preparedness and the focus on project completion rather than participating in and learning from well-run and productive research teams 36. Specialist trainees are not unique in this regard; these pressures have been described in the earlier phases of clinical training, including by medical students 37 38. At each stage of training, the problem seems to be a focus on individual projects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do trainee doctors learn about research? Content analysis of Australian specialist colleges’ intended research curricula

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesPatients do better in research-intense environments. The importance of research is reflected in the accreditation requirements of Australian clinical specialist colleges. The nature of college-mandated research training has not been systematically explored. We examined the intended research curricula of Australian trainee doctors described by specialist colleges, their constructive alignment and the nature of scholarly project requirements.DesignWe undertook content analysis of publicly available documents to characterise college research training curricula.SettingWe reviewed all publicly accessible information from the websites of Australian specialist colleges and their subspecialty divisions. We retrieved curricula, handbooks and assessment-related documents.ParticipantsFifty-eight Australian specialist colleges and their subspecialty divisions.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTwo reviewers extracted and coded research-related activities as learning outcomes, activities or assessments, by research stage (using, participating in or leading research) and competency based on Bloom’s taxonomy (remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating, creating). We coded learning and assessment activities by type (eg, formal research training, publication) and whether it was linked to a scholarly project. Requirements related to project supervisors’ research experience were noted.ResultsFifty-five of 58 Australian college subspecialty divisions had a scholarly project requirement. Only 11 required formal research training; two required an experienced research supervisor. Colleges emphasised a role for trainees in leading research in their learning outcomes and assessments, but not learning activities. Less emphasis was placed on using research, and almost no emphasis on participation. Most learning activities and assessments mapped to the ‘creating’ domain of Bloom’s taxonomy, whereas most learning outcomes mapped to the ‘evaluating’ domain. Overall, most research learning and assessment activities were related to leading a scholarly project.ConclusionsAustralian specialist college research curricula appear to emphasise a role for trainees in leading research and producing research deliverables, but do not mandate formal research training and supervision by experienced researchers.

show abstract

“…We agree with Sharp and Curlewis12 that all healthcare students, including medical students, should learn to be critical readers and users of research 34; few students will want or need to be able to lead research (“doers”). We waste students’ time and serve them poorly by assuming that teaching them all to be doers will make them good users.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%