• B M Stutchfield, E M Harrison, S J Wigmore, R W Parks, and O J Garden.
• Clinical and Surgical Sciences (Surgery), University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. bstutchfield@nhs.net
• Scot Med J. 2011 Nov 1;56(4):206-9.

AbstractWith recent 'working-time'-related changes to surgical training structure, the value of dedicated research during surgical training has been questioned. Online survey examining career and academic outcomes following a period of surgically related dedicated research at a Scottish University between 1972 and 2007. Of 58 individuals identified, contact details were available for 49 and 43 (88%) responded. Ninety-five percent (n = 41) of respondents continue to pursue a career in surgery and 41% (n = 17) are currently in academic positions. Ninety-one percent (n = 39) had published one or more first-author peer-reviewed articles directly related to their research, with 53% (n = 23) publishing three or more. Respondents with a clinical component to their research published significantly more papers than those with purely laboratory-based research (P = 0.04). Eighty-one percent (n = 35) thought that research was necessary for career progression, but only 42% (n = 18) felt research should be integral to training. In conclusion, the majority of surgical trainees completing a dedicated research period, published papers and continued to pursue a surgical career with a research interest. A period of dedicated research was thought necessary for career progression, but few thought dedicated research should be integral to surgical training.

20 keywords...

hide…