Resident Outcomes and Perspectives Over 2 Years of a New Scholarship Curriculum

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Scholarship is recognized as a challenge in many family medicine residency programs. Among evaluations of scholarship curricula, few describe resident experiences of such interventions. To bridge this gap in knowledge, we measured resident confidence, satisfaction, and participation before and after implementing a new scholarship curriculum. Methods: The redesigned curriculum included a structured project timeline, resident research in progress meetings, faculty mentorship, scholarly skills workshops, and mentored journal clubs. We conducted a curriculum evaluation via surveys of residents prior to implementation and after years 1 and 2, measuring satisfaction with the scholarly environment and opportunities, and confidence and participation in specific scholarly activities using Likert scales from 1 (least confidence) to 5. Results: Compared to baseline (n=28), after 2 years (n=27) of the curriculum, residents reported increased mean confidence in critical appraisal of scientific articles (2.6±1.1 to 3.3±0.7, P=.007), carrying out a scholarly project (2.5±0.8 to 3.4±1.0, P=.005), and writing an abstract (3.0±0.8 to 3.8±0.7, P=.002). As compared to the first year, more residents in the second year participated in quality improvement projects (7.1% vs 29.6%, P=.031) and wrote conference abstracts (10.7% vs 37.0%, P=.022). Over the same period, those very satisfied with the scholarly environment increased from 0 (0%) to 8 (29.6%, P=.017). The June 2020 survey identified increased interest in scholarship because of the antiracism movement (51.9%) and COVID-19 pandemic (40.7%). Conclusions: Implementation of a redesigned scholarship curriculum was associated with increases in family medicine resident scholarship confidence and satisfaction.

“Not just a checkbox”: A qualitative study of the resident scholarly experience

“…These include longitudinal research curricula spanning the entirety of residency, dedicated research blocks, or curricula that can be adapted to either format. [10][11][12][13][14][15] Scholarly tracks for residents have also become increasingly popular in emergency medicine (EM) residencies as a way to stimulate interest in a specific scholarly niche, marshal mentorship, and foster opportunities for scholarship. [16][17][18] Two recent systematic reviews demonstrate that no single educational intervention produces a significant increase in resident publications.…”

“…Numerous strategies for increasing resident scholarly activity exist. These include longitudinal research curricula spanning the entirety of residency, dedicated research blocks, or curricula that can be adapted to either format 10–15 . Scholarly tracks for residents have also become increasingly popular in emergency medicine (EM) residencies as a way to stimulate interest in a specific scholarly niche, marshal mentorship, and foster opportunities for scholarship 16–18 .…”

Association between residents' scholarly activities and publication requirement policy

“…It is not known which is the best among the various reported methods on how to promote scholarly activities in residency programs 7,9,12–21 . Some studies concluded that “a scholarly culture is most important” to promote scholarly activities 8,16 and the JPS reform of the publication requirement policy in 2017 can be said to act at least as a compelling force, so to speak, to promote a scholarly culture.…”

“…Scholarship has become increasingly important in postgraduate medical education 1–4 . The core competencies for residents include scholarship, 1,2,5 and trainees themselves have reported a desire for and satisfaction from participation in scholarly activities 4,6–10 . However, it has been reported that scholarly activities, particularly article publication, were scarce in pediatrics residency training in Japan 11…”

“…[1][2][3][4] The core competencies for residents include scholarship, 1,2,5 and trainees themselves have reported a desire for and satisfaction from participation in scholarly activities. 4,[6][7][8][9][10] However, it has been reported that scholarly activities, particularly article publication, were scarce in pediatrics residency training in Japan. 11 There have been many reports on the promotion of scholarly activities in postgraduate training worldwide.The reported methods were varied, such as research curricula, protected research time, supervision or mentorship, research progress tracks, or required scholarly activities, although it is not known which strategy is most effective.…”