Advertisement

Predictors and Barriers to Faculty Scholarly Activity in United States Urology Residency Programs

Published:January 25, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.10.047

      Abstract

      Objective

      To determine factors and barriers associated with scholarly activity among faculty members at urology residency programs in the United States.

      Methods

      An online survey was sent to all 134 urology residency program directors. The survey assessed program characteristics including size, location and definition of scholarly activity. It assessed available support for and barriers to resident scholarly activity, faculty participation in scholarly activity and mentorship of residents. Linear regression analysis was used.

      Results

      We had a 40% response rate (N = 40). Faculty attitudes toward conducting scholarly activity (P < .001) and lack of a research curriculum (P = .05) were barriers to the outcome ‘participation in scholarly activity’. Faculty attitudes toward conducting scholarly activity was also a barrier to the outcomes ‘mentorship of residents’ (P = .004) and ‘publication of at least 1 paper’ (P = .004). Available statistician was positively associated with the outcomes ‘publications’ (P = .062) and ‘presentations’ (P = .032). A minimum requirement of a local presentation (P=0.04) and chairman support (P = .015) were positively associated with the outcome ‘presentation at a conference.’

      Conclusion

      Training residents in research matters for the resident, the institution and future generations of surgeon scientists. Higher levels of faculty scholarly activity were associated with a minimum requirement for residents to submit a manuscript for publication, strong chairman support for resident research, and the availability of a statistician. A common barrier to faculty scholarly activity, publications, and resident mentorship was faculty attitudes toward resident scholarly activity. Urology residency programs seeking to prioritize scholarly activity among faculty should consider these factors.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Urology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

      1. ACGME. Clinically-driven standards | ACGME common program requirements. 2017:1-27.http://www.acgme.org/outcome/comp/GeneralCompetenciesStandards21307.pdf%0Ahttps://acgmecommon.org/2017_requirements.

        • Francesca Monn M
        • Wang MH
        • Gilson MM
        • Chen B
        • Kern D
        • Gearhart SL
        ACGME core competency training, mentorship, and research in surgical subspecialty fellowship programs.
        J Surg Educ. 2013; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2012.11.006
        • Montie J
        • Faerber G
        • Schaeffer A
        • et al.
        Urology residency and research: round table discussion and plea for innovation.
        Urology. 2008; 71: 762-765https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.10.040
        • Chung SW
        • Clifton JS
        • Rowe AJ
        • Finley RJ
        • Warnock GL
        Strategic faculty recruitment increases research productivity within an academic university division.
        Can J Surg. 2009; 52: 401-406
        • Bell TM
        • Valsangkar N
        • Joshi M
        • et al.
        The role of PhD faculty in advancing research in Departments of Surgery.
        Ann Surg. 2017; 265: 111-115https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001657
        • Peyton CC
        • Badlani GH
        Residency : current status.
        Urology. 2014; 83: 719-725https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.09.072
        • Finkelstein JB
        • Batavia JP Van
        • Rosoff JS
        The difference a year can make: academic productivity of residents in 5 vs 6-year urology programs.
        Urology. 2015; 86: 220-223https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.03.057
        • Coffey DS
        Training the urologic scientist—an endangered species.
        Urology. 2002; 59: 315-317https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01593-x
        • Yang G
        • Zaid UB
        • Erickson BA
        • Blaschko SD
        • Carroll PR
        • Breyer BN
        Urology resident publication output and its relationship to future academic achievement.
        J Urol. 2011; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.097
        • Reck SJ
        • Stratman EJ
        • Vogel C
        • Mukesh BN
        Assessment of residents’ loss of interest in academic careers and identification of correctable factors.
        Arch Dermatol. 2006; 142: 855-858https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.142.7.855
        • Abramson EL
        • Naifeh MM
        • Stevenson MD
        • et al.
        Research training among pediatric residency programs: a national assessment.
        Acad Med. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000404
        • Crawford P
        • Seehusen D
        Scholarly activity in family medicine residency programs: a national survey.
        Fam Med. 2011; 43: 311-317
        • Zimmerman R
        • Alweis R
        • Short A
        • Wasser T
        • Donato A
        Interventions to increase research publications in graduate medical education trainees: a systematic review.
        Arch Med Sci. 2019; https://doi.org/10.5114/aoms.2018.81033
        • Philibert I
        • Lieh-Lai M
        • Miller R
        • Potts JR
        • Brigham T
        • Nasca TJ
        Scholarly activity in the Next Accreditation System: moving from structure and process to outcomes.
        J Grad Med Educ. 2014; https://doi.org/10.4300/jgme-05-04-43
        • Panchal A
        • Denninghoff K
        • Munger B
        • Keim S
        Scholar quest: a residency research program aligned with faculty goals.
        West J Emerg Med. 2014; 15: 299-305https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2013.8.16155
        • Jordan J
        • Coates W
        • Clarke S
        • et al.
        The uphill battle of performing education scholarship: barriers educators and education researchers face.
        West J Emerg Med. 2018; https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2018.1.36752
        • Stevenson MD
        • Smigielski EM
        • Naifeh MM
        • Abramson EL
        • Todd C
        • Li STT
        Increasing scholarly activity productivity during residency: a systematic review.
        Acad Med. 2017; 92: 250-266https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001169
        • Ozuah PO
        Residency research requirement as a predictor of future publication productivity.
        J Pediatr. 2009; 155: 1-2.e1https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.03.056
        • Wallack MK
        • Reilly L
        • Whalen T
        • et al.
        Scholarly activity.
        J Surg Educ. 2009; 66: 292-295https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2009.09.003
        • Grady EC
        • Roise A
        • Barr D
        • et al.
        Defining scholarly activity in graduate medical education.
        J Grad Med Educ. 2013; 4: 558-561https://doi.org/10.4300/jgme-d-12-00266.1
        • Sheridan J
        • Savoy JN
        • Kaatz A
        • Lee Y-G
        • Filut A
        • Carnes M
        Write more articles, get more grants: the impact of department climate on faculty research productivity.
        J Women's Heal. 2017; 26: 587-596https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2016.6022
        • Wolfe J
        • Wolfe J
        • Smith K
        • Yoho R
        • Vardaxis V
        A strategic plan for increasing scholarly activity among medical students, residents, and faculty.
        J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2018; 108: 292-303https://doi.org/10.7547/16-014