This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (6)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Robert M. Naclerio, MD; Supinda Saengpanich, MD; Mary Spainhour; Fuad M. Baroody, MD

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127:1181-1184.

Objective  To determine the attitude toward and the state of research within the field of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery.

Design  A questionnaire was sent to the chairpersons of departments of otolaryngology where residency training is provided.

Participants and Setting  Program directors of academic otolaryngology training programs.

Main Outcome Measure  Responses to questionnaire.

Results  Questionnaires were sent to 95 programs from which 86 responses were received. Respondents believed strongly that research was important to the specialty. Only two thirds of the full-time clinical faculty, however, do research, and on average they devote only 17% of their time to this activity. About a third of those doing research have funding, and the National Institutes of Health support only 12% of clinician-investigators. Although program directors believe that clinicians should do research, three fourths stated that clinicians were too busy to accomplish this goal. Surprisingly, half of the respondents were unaware of residency programs that offered 2 years of research training, aimed to develop clinician-investigators, who can become competitive for attainment of research funding.

Conclusions  Although leaders within our specialty believe that research is important, clinicians are not provided with enough time to conduct research. Furthermore, pathways that would enhance their competitiveness to obtain research funding are not recommended to our future clinicians.

From the Section of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

The Value of Research in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
Michael M. E. Johns
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(10):1185.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(10):1289-1291.
FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Better Than Buffett?: A Report on the Success of the American Head and Neck Society Research Grant Program
Kupferman et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;135:1082-1086.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Research Training in Otolaryngology: An Impending Crisis?
Wolf and Weymuller
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:1239-1241.
FULL TEXT  

The Future of Research in Otolaryngology
Koempel et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:982-983.
FULL TEXT  

The Value of Research in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery
Johns
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;127:1185-1185.
FULL TEXT