• Dean A Seehusen, Christy J W Ledford, Scott Grogan, Eugene Kim, Jeremy J Johnson, Mark E Stackle, Lloyd A Runser, Matthew V Fargo, James W Keck, Anna L Oberhofer, and Richard Shoemaker.
• Department of Family and Community Medicine, Eisenhower Army Medical Center.
• Fam Med. 2017 Mar 1; 49 (3): 222-224.

IntroductionEncouraging resident scholarly activity has been a longstanding challenge for medical educators. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) has been increasing its emphasis on scholarly activity, forcing programs to evaluate their existing processes. This study sought to evaluate the impact of a scholarly activity point system on the resident scholarly productivity at multiple programs.MethodsFive military family medicine residencies evaluated resident outcomes 2 years before and 2 years after the introduction of a scholarly activity point system. Outcome measures included peer-reviewed publications with a resident as first author, peer-reviewed publications with a resident as any author, resident presentation of scholarship at a regional, national, and international conference, IRB-approved protocols with a resident as principal investigator, and IRB-approved protocols with a resident in any role.ResultsFour of the five programs experienced substantial increases in nearly every outcome. The fifth program, which had a more robust culture of inquiry at baseline, did not experience an increase in resident scholarly productivity.ConclusionsA scholarly activity point system was associated with an increase in resident scholarly production in family medicine programs. It appears to work best in programs that start from a lower level of scholarly productivity at baseline. A point system appears to be a useful addition to scholarly activity curricula.

15 keywords...

hide…