Search

Introduction: The medical field is currently facing a physician-scientist shortage. One possible solution is to direct medical students towards a research oriented career. To do so, knowledge is needed on how to motivate medical students to do research. Therefore, this study examines motivation for research and identifies factors influencing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for research among first-year medical students., Methods: First-year medical students were surveyed at the beginning of their bachelor's program in 2016. On a 7-point Likert scale, students reported their motivation for research, self-efficacy, perceptions of research, curiosity, and need for challenge. Regression analyses were used to examine the influence of these factors on students' motivation for research., Results: Out of 316 approached students, 315 participated (99.7%). On average, students scored 5.49 on intrinsic, and 5.66 on extrinsic motivation for research. All factors measured influenced intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for research significantly and positively, also after adjusting for gender and age. Cumulative regression showed that these factors explained 39.6% of the variance in intrinsic, and 14% in extrinsic motivation for research., Discussion: All factors play an important role in intrinsic and, to a lesser extent, extrinsic motivation for research. First-year medical students' motivation for research could be enhanced by stimulating positive self-efficacy beliefs, positive perceptions of research, and curiosity. Also, it is important to fulfil students' needs for challenge by stimulating them to actively conduct research. Thus, to catch students young and cultivate physician-scientists, students should be stimulated to engage in research from the beginning of medical training.

The U.S. physician-scientist (PS) workforce is invaluable to the nation's biomedical research effort. It is through biomedical research that certain diseases have been eliminated, cures for others have been discovered, and medical procedures and therapies that save lives have been developed. Yet, the U.S. PS workforce has both declined and aged over the last several years. The resulting decreased inflow and outflow to the PS pipeline renders the system vulnerable to collapsing suddenly as the senior workforce retires. In November 2015, the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine hosted a consensus conference on the PS workforce to address issues impacting academic medical schools, with input from early-career PSs based on their individual experiences and concerns. One of the goals of the conference was to identify current impediments in attracting and supporting PSs and to develop a new set of recommendations for sustaining the PS workforce in 2016 and beyond. This Perspective reports on the opportunities and factors identified at the conference and presents five recommendations designed to increase entry into the PS pipeline and nine recommendations designed to decrease attrition from the PS workflow.

Purpose: Physician-scientists are a population in decline globally. Solutions to reverse this decline often have focused on the training pipeline. Less attention has been paid to reducing attrition post training, when physician-scientists take up faculty roles. However, this period is a known time of vulnerability because of the pressures of clinical duties and the long timeline to securing independent research funding. This narrative review explored existing knowledge regarding how best to support physician-scientists for success in their faculty roles., Method: The authors searched the Medline, Embase, ERIC, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published from 2000 to 2016 on this topic and interviewed key informants in 2015 to solicit their input on the review results., Results: The authors reviewed 78 articles and interviewed 16 key informants. From the literature, they developed a framework of organizational (facilitate mentorship, foster community, value the physician-scientist role, minimize financial barriers) and individual (develop professional and research skills) strategies for supporting physician-scientists. They also outlined key knowledge gaps representing topics either rarely or never addressed in the reviewed articles (percent research time, structural hypocrisy, objective assessment, group metrics, professional identity). The key informants confirmed the identified strategies and discussed how the gaps were particularly important and impactful., Conclusions: This framework offers a basis for assessing an organization's existing support strategies, identifying outstanding needs, and developing targeted programming. The identified gaps require attention, as they threaten to undermine the benefits of existing support strategies.

Introduction: The French Cancer Plan 2014-2019 stresses the importance of strengthening collaboration between all stakeholders involved in the fight against cancer, including cancer cooperative groups and intergroups. This survey aimed to describe the basics characteristics and clinical research activity among the Cancer Cooperative Groups (Groupes coopérateurs en oncologie). The second objective was to identify facilitators and barriers to their research activity., Methods: A questionnaire was sent to all the clinicians involved in 2014 as investigators in a clinical trial sponsored by one of the ten members of the Cancer Cooperative Groups network. The questions were related to their profile, research activity and the infrastructure existing within their healthcare center to support clinical research and related compliance activities., Results: In total, 366 investigators responded to our survey. The academic clinical trials sponsored by the Cancer Cooperative Groups represented an important part of the research activity of the investigators in France in 2014. These academic groups contributed to the opening of many research sites throughout all regions in France. Factors associated with a higher participation of investigators (more than 10 patients enrolled in a trial over a year) include the existing support of healthcare professionals (more than 2 clinical research associate (CRA) OR=11.16 [3.82-32.6] compared to none) and the practice of their research activity in a University Hospital Center (CHU) rather than a Hospital Center (CH) (OR=2.15 [1.20-3.83])., Conclusion: This study highlighted factors that can strengthen investigator clinical research activities and subsequently improve patient access to evidence-based new cancer therapies in France., (Copyright © 2017 Société Française du Cancer. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Nurses are expected to deliver cost-effective, high-quality care. In order to provide this care, nurse researchers are needed to evaluate and research effective health care models and interventions. By including research concepts within a baccalaureate nursing program, interest in nursing research can be increased. The purpose of this article is to present a case study of strategies used in an undergraduate liberal arts nursing program to promote zest in research and increase the pursuit of graduate studies among baccalaureate nursing students. Using the Bronfenbrenner ecological framework, the promotion of research is categorized into microsystems (individual), mesosystems (multiple setting), exosystems (program), and macrosystem (institutional culture) levels. The microsystem level includes engagement in the classroom, engagement in one-on-one meetings, and faculty members as role models. The mesosystem involves engagement outside the classroom and encouragement from faculty members. The exosystem level describes specific learning activities and programs the nursing department utilizes such as community assessments, preconception reproductive knowledge promotion, and women supporting women. Finally, the macrosystem includes a supportive and encouraging environment. By working together, each system contributes to the students' zest for nursing research and interest in graduate studies in nursing to pursue the role of a nurse researcher., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Medical trainees are required to undertake audit and quality improvement projects. They must also have an understanding of the principles of research and are encouraged to participate in research projects. However, the constraints of time, a lack of formal training and rotation between different training posts create barriers to audit cycle completion and pursuing research. This leads to trainees being reluctant to undertake research, facilitates poor quality research and risks incomplete audit., Participants: The Welsh Geriatricians Network (WeGeN) has been created with the aims of facilitating collaborative, trainee-led research within Geriatric Medicine in Wales, promoting research engagement and improving the research evidence base for older patients. By coordinating collaborative research projects across different sites within Wales, trainees continue existing projects at new sites, allowing completion of projects and establishing the long-term infrastructure and experienced personnel needed for high-quality research data to be gathered., Findings: WeGeN has facilitated 4 national audits, all of which are intended for peer review publication. The first project considers the service provision for the older person in the emergency department, the second Parkinson's disease, the third reviews delirium management and the fourth project considers epidemiology of surgical disease in older people., Future Plans: The objective of this project is to further establish and develop WeGeN as a group which facilitates high-quality research and provides the opportunity for geriatric trainees to engage in research activity. It is anticipated that the establishment of this research platform will provide a blueprint for the development of other such networks in the UK and beyond., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

The world's 1.89 billion children (age 0-14) too frequently receive treatments that have not been validated through clinical pharmacology research, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Initial findings from an international asset map of professionals and clinician scientists available to address the needs for education, research, and treatment support suggest a critical shortage of clinical pharmacologists, clinical pharmacists, and other professionals with advanced training in the evaluation of therapies for childhood conditions and illnesses. A total of 497 individuals responded to a survey conducted between May 2015 and February 2016. An alarming signal is apparent showing that, while the overall resource pool is unquestionably limited, 87% of relevant qualified personnel are located in high-income countries. The data suggest an urgent need for targeted training in pediatric clinical pharmacology, with particular focus on the needs in Africa, Latin America, and most of Asia., (© 2016 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Breakthrough advances in medicine almost uniformly result from the translation of new basic scientific knowledge into clinical practice, rather than from assessment, modification or refinement of current methods of diagnosis and treatment. However, as is intuitively understood, those most responsible for scientific conception and creation-scientists - are generally not the ones applying these advances at the patient's bedside or the operating room, and vice versa. Recognition of the scarcity of clinicians with a background that prepares them to develop new basic knowledge, and to critically evaluate the underlying scientific basis of methods of diagnosis and treatment, has led to initiatives including federally funded Physician-Scientist programs, whereby young, motivated scholars begin a rigorous training, which encompasses education and mentorship within both medical and scientific fields, culminating in the conferment of both MD and PhD degrees. Graduates have demonstrated success in integrating science into their academic medical careers. However, for unknown reasons, orthopaedic surgery, more than other specialties, has struggled to recruit and retain physician-scientists, who possess a skill set evermore rare in today's increasingly complicated medical and scientific landscape. While the reasons for this shortfall have yet to be completely elucidated, one thing is clear: If orthopaedics is to make significant advances in the diagnosis and treatment of musculoskeletal diseases and injuries, recruitment of the very best and brightest physician-scientists to orthopaedics must become a priority. This commentary explores potential explanations for current low-recruitment success regarding future orthopaedic surgeon-scientists, and discusses avenues for resolution.