The State of Resident Research in Family Medicine: Small but Growing (original) (raw)
Related papers
The beginning of the research stream in family medicine residency program at McMaster University
BMC medical education, 2001
To examine research background, attitudes, knowledge and skills of family medicine residents with regard to primary care research and to compare residents who elected to participate in the research stream with those who did not. Mailed survey of Family Medicine residents at McMaster University in 1998, 70% (52/74) of whom responded. The main outcome measures consisted of research background; attitudes towards primary care research and research activities during residency program; knowledge and skills in applying it in biostatistics, epidemiology, and research design. The vast majority of the residents reported previous research experience and/or some training in epidemiology and biostatistics. Residents in the research stream were more likely to be female and were positive towards primary care research: they were more interested in research, more interested in obtaining more research training while a resident, and placed more importance on developing research early in medical educat...
Family Medicine and Community Health
Research is crucial to the development of family medicine around the world. However, family physicians in practice often hesitate to enter into investigative endeavours. Common reasons for such hesitation include limited exposure to the process of conducting research and the belief that research is best conducted by academic scholars. Our intent here is to encourage clinically focused family physicians’ involvement in research activities by explaining how they can cultivate inquisitiveness so as to develop questions for exploration. We present an approach to research that focuses on five steps emergent from the day-to-day, habitual practice of family medicine, wherever in the world it is practised. We illustrate this approach by describing a successful practice-based research study. We conclude by inviting all family physicians to consider integrating research into their practice lives so as to expand their professional horizons and help educate the next generation of global family ...
Uncloaking Family Medicine Research: So Much To Know, So Little Time
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 2013
In their article "A Small Percentage of Family Physicians Report Time Devoted to Research," Voorhees et al 1 estimate that only 4.9% of the 28,505 boardcertified family physicians in the United States who completed a census before taking the maintenance of certification examination in 2007 to 2009 reported spending any time on research. Of the 4.9% who reported doing research, 3.9% said they spent Ͻ10% of their time in research, and only 0.3% reported conducting research during Ͼ50% of their time. The authors concluded that most research by family physicians was done in urban areas and by medical school/residency faculty. Research Is Not the Norm Despite multiple calls to increase the capacity of family medicine research, 2-4 family physicians in the United States traditionally have avoided participating in clinical research, and medical students planning a research career have been less likely to select family medicine as a specialty. 5
Family Medicine Research in the United States From the late 1960s Into the Future
Family medicine, 2017
When the new field of family medicine research began a half century ago, multiple individuals and organizations emphasized that research was a key mission. Since the field's inception, there have been notable research successes for which family medicine organizations, researchers, and leaders-assisted by federal and state governments and private foundations-can take credit. Research is a requirement for family medicine residency programs but not individual residents, and multiple family medicine departments offer research training in various forms for learners at all levels, including research fellowships. Family physicians have developed practice-based research networks (PBRNs) to conduct investigations and generate new knowledge. The field of family medicine has seen the creation of new journals to support the publication of research relevant to practicing family physicians. Nonetheless, in spite of much growth and many successes, family physicians and their research have been...
A Comparison of Family Medicine Research in Research Intense and Less Intense Institutions
Archives of Family Medicine, 2000
Background: Family medicine is a relatively new specialty that has been trying to develop a research base for 30 years. It is unclear how institutional research success and emphasis have affected the research productivity of family medicine departments. Objective: To examine the research infrastructure, productivity, and barriers to productivity in academic family medicine in research intense and less intense institutions. Design, Setting, and Participants: A survey of 124 chairs among institutional members of the Association of Departments of Family Medicine. Departments were categorized as being associated with research intense institutions (defined as the top 40 in National Institute of Health funding) or less intense institutions. Main Outcome Measures: Prioritization of research as a mission, number of funded research grants, total number of research articles published, and number of faculty and staff conducting research. Results: The response rate was 55% (N=68). Of 5 potential ratings on the survey, research was the fourth highest departmental priority in both categories of institutions. Departments in research intense institutions were larger, had more faculty on investigational tracks, and employed more research support staff (PϽ.05). Neither category of department published a large number (me-dian=10 in both groups) of peer-reviewed articles per year. Controlling for the number of full-time equivalent faculty, the departments in less intense institutions published a median of 0.7 articles, while the research intense institutions published 0.5 (P =.30). Departments in research intense institutions received more grant funding (PϽ.005) in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Chairs reported a scarcity of qualified applicants for research physician faculty openings. Conclusion: Future initiatives should focus on prioritizing research and creating a critical mass of researchers in family medicine.
Enhancing research in a family medicine program: one institution's story
Family medicine
To enhance research productivity among East Tennessee State University's faculty, the Department of Family Medicine developed and implemented a multi-component initiative to expand multidisciplinary primary care research. The research support infrastructure expanded to include a family physician research director, three PhD faculty researchers, two research assistants, a statistician, and a grant/science writer. A monthly seminar series, quarterly workshops, and a formal mentoring program paired more-experienced with less-experienced faculty researchers. Through a competitive mechanism in which junior faculty submitted proposals, a multidisciplinary committee selected two family physician researchers to receive protected time to develop their research. From 2001-2006, more than 25 experienced researchers served as mentors, lecturers, consultants, or reviewers. Fifteen mentor-mentee pairs were formed. Of 30 family medicine faculty, the number actively engaged in research, includi...
Clinical research in family medicine: quantity and quality of published articles
Family medicine, 2003
Publication of clinical research in peer-reviewed journals is an important measure of scholarly productivity. This study determined the quantity and quality of original clinical research published by family physicians. We surveyed clinical research papers published in the year 2000 in four leading family medicine research journals and research originating in a family practice institution but published in 16 non-family medicine journals. All were selected on the basis of relevance to family physicians and "impact factor." The relevance and validity of papers was assessed using previously established criteria. The survey of family medicine journals revealed a total of 170 original research articles. Ninety eight were from academic family practice programs, and the remaining 72 were from other medical specialties or health care institutions. Most of the papers were cross-sectional surveys. There were seven qualitative studies, six randomized controlled trials, and no systemat...