This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Charles W. Cummings, MD

Arch Otolaryngol. 1982;108(10):630-632.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

I have been given the almost impossible task of assessing the status of research in otolaryngology residency programs across the country. How best to do this is elusive to me. However, three methods seem appropriate for the task. The first is to sample the philosophical opinions of program directors representing widely varied sized and geographically situated programs. The second is to review the pertinent results of the Society of University Ophthalmologists (SUO) survey, performed in 1981, regarding research and residency programs. The third is the presentation of an example of a program with a mandatory research rotation, specifically, that of the University of Washington, Seattle.

Prior to composing this article, I thought it best to sample the opinions of directors of representative otolaryngology training programs. What follows are excerpts from letters composed by seven program directors in response to the question, What roles do researchers play in their training programs . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Otolaryngology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication June 7, 1982.

Read in part before the First National Conference on Research Goals and Methods in Otolaryngology, Bethesda, Md, April 16, 1982.

Reprint requests to the Department of Otolaryngology, RL-30, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA 98195 (Dr Cummings).

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