Predictors of sustained research involvement among MD/PhD programme graduates
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CONTEXT: MD/PhD programmes provide structured paths for physician-scientist training. However, considerable proportions of graduates of these programmes do not pursue careers in research consistent with their training. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors associated with sustained involvement in research after completion of all postgraduate training. METHODS: Anonymised data from a national survey of Canadian MD/PhD programme graduates who had completed all physician-scientist training (n = 70) were analysed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to measure the associations between characteristics of graduates and five indicators of sustained research involvement following postgraduate training: (i) protected research time in the current appointment; (ii) percentage of time dedicated to research; (iii) planned future involvement in research; (iv) role as a principal investigator on a recent funded project, and (v) receipt of funding from a federal granting agency since graduation. RESULTS: The majority of graduates were significantly involved in research on the basis of at least one outcome. Completion of a research fellowship, number of first-authored or co-authored manuscripts published during MD/PhD training, and duration of MD/PhD training were positively associated with continued research involvement. Completion of a Masters degree prior to MD/PhD training, female gender, debt greater than CAD$50 000 at completion of training, and pursuit of a clinical specialty other than internal medicine, paediatrics, neurology, pathology and the surgical specialties were negatively associated with sustained research involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Most MD/PhD programme graduates remain significantly involved in research, but this involvement often does not correspond to traditional physician-scientist roles, in which a majority of time is dedicated to research. To minimise loss of investment in physician-scientist training, MD/PhD programmes should prioritise research productivity during training and the pursuit of additional research training during residency, and policymakers should establish stable sources of funding to reduce debt among graduates. Our data suggest further study is warranted to identify interventions to reduce attrition among female MD/PhD programme graduates.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,164 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».