RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 A cross sectional survey of Australian and New Zealand specialist trainees’ research experiences and outputs
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.03.11.24303739
DO 10.1101/2024.03.11.24303739
A1 Stehlik, Paulina
A1 Withers, Caitlyn
A1 Bourke, Rachel
A1 Barnett, Adrian
A1 Brandenburg, Caitlin
A1 Noble, Christy
A1 Bannach-Brown, Alexandra
A1 Keijzers, Gerben
A1 Scott, Ian
A1 Glasziou, Paul
A1 Veysey, Emma
A1 Mickan, Sharon
A1 Morgan, Mark
A1 Joshi, Hitesh
A1 Forrest, Kirsty
A1 Campbell, Thomas
A1 Henry, David
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/03/13/2024.03.11.24303739.abstract
AB Objective To explore medical trainees’ experiences and views concerning college-mandated research projects.Setting Online survey (Apr-Dec 2021) of current and recent past trainees of Australian and New Zealand colleges recruited through 11 principal colleges and snowballing.Participants Current trainee or completed training in the past 5 years.Main outcome measures We asked participants: whether they were required to conduct research as part of their college training, how they conducted their research, and their research activity after training. Respondents were invited to submit project reports for reporting and methodological quality evaluation. Data were analysed descriptively.Results Of the 372 respondents, 313 (86%) were required to complete one or more projects. Of the 177 who had completed their project (representing 267 projects), 76 provided information on 92 studies, with 34 reports submitted for evaluation. Most respondents developed their own research questions, study design and protocol, and conducted research in their own time, with 56% (38/68) stating they had the skills to complete their project. Most project teams consisted of their own medical specialty followed by statisticians, but seldom others.44% (30/68) were satisfied with their research experience, and 53% (36/67) supported mandatory projects. Half (87/174) felt research was important for career development, 72% (44/61) considered initiating research post-training, and 54% (33/61) participated in it.Commonly expressed themes were time-burden of conducting projects, production of research waste, and the importance of research for skills development. Of the 34 submitted reports, 75% were published and 82% had a clear research question. Only three had a low risk of bias.Conclusion Majority of respondents conducted projects, but few shared details or reports. Despite valuing their research experiences and seeing clinical relevance, time conflicts and research waste were common concerns. Colleges should focus on enhanced research methods training and creating trainee research collaboratives.Protocol registration https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BNGZKSummary box Majority of medical specialty trainees are required to conduct a research project to develop their research skills.We found the learning experiences are inconsistent, and the quality of research produced even more so.A new approach is required that is tailored to the research skills required by most practicing clinicians, namely being expert in applying research to practice and in participating in collaborative research. Those wishing to become leaders in research should be supported to do so via a specialised well-supported pathway.Competing Interest StatementPaulina Stehlikis currently on the Queensland Training for Research Active Clinicians (QTRAC) Working Party. Caitlyn Withers is a current Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Trainee. Rachel Bourke No conflict of interest to declare. Adrian Barnettis a current member of the NHMRC Research Quality Steering Committee. Caitlin Brandenburg is currently on the Queensland Training for Research Active Clinicians (QTRAC) Working Party. Christy Noble No conflict of interest to declare. Alexandra Bannach-BrownNo conflict of interest to declare. Gerben KeijzersGK is a trainee research requirement adjudicator for the Australasian College of Emergency Medicine Ian Scott gives lectures on research methods to trainees of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians and has been an examiner for the college. Paul Glasziou is a current chair of the NHMRC Research Quality Steering Committee Emma Veysey is chair of the Australasian College of Dermatologists Academic Research Committee. Sharon Mickan No conflict of interest to declare. Mark Morgan is the clinical advisor and chair of RACGP Expert Committee for Quality Care. Clinical advisor for Primary Sense (Australian GP data extraction and analysis tool). Head of Program for Medical Doctorate at Bond University Hitesh Joshi is a member (Casual) on the RANZCP Committee for Exanimations. Kirsty Forrest is Dean of Medicine, Bond University. Executive committee member and Treasurer Medical Deans of Australia and New Zealand (MDANZ). Chair of Education and Evalution committee (EDEC) of the Australia and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) and Chair of Professional Practice research network (PPRN) ANCZA Thomas Campbell is on the Curriculum Commitee for the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists David Henry No Conflicts to report   Clinical Protocols https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BNGZK Funding StatementThis study was funded by the Gold Coast Health Collaborative Research Grant Scheme 2020 (RGS2020-037).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Bond University Human Research Ethics Committee PS00149.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors. https://osf.io/346xe/