To examine how to increase research career outcomes among medical graduates, we analyzed the impact of the Research Scholarly Concentration at The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences. Residency placement, subsequent scholarship, and career outcomes were compared among 670 graduates who participated in the elective Clinical and Translational Research Scholarly Concentration or no Concentration between 2009 and 2018. We conducted a retrospective study of residency match (highly selective vs less selective), job type (academic vs non-academic), and postmedical school publications (any vs none). We compared the outcomes between Research Scholarly Concentration graduates and those with no Concentration, matched by graduation year (n=335). For Research Scholarly Concentration graduates, we examined the association between research outcomes and duration of research experience before medical school (n=232). Research Scholarly Concentration graduates were more likely to place in a highly selective residency (40.2% vs 21.6%, p<0.0001), 68% more likely to publish after medical school (OR=1.68, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.58), and almost four times as likely to have taken an academic health center job (OR=3.82, 95% CI 1.72 to 8.46) than graduates with no Concentration. Surprisingly, the length of research experience before medical school was not associated with these outcomes among Research Scholarly Concentration graduates. This suggests that a medical school Research Scholarly Concentration is effective in training physician researchers and should be available to both novices and research-experienced matriculants. These data suggest how other medical schools might plan Scholarly Concentration programs to improve research outcomes among medical graduates.
- academic medical centers
- education, medical
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Contributors AKH contributed substantially to the conception and design of the work, as well as data acquisition, analysis and interpretation, drafted and revised the manuscript, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. LR and AA contributed substantially to the design of the work, data analysis and interpretation, revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. LR also contributed substantially to data acquisition. JA contributed substantially to the acquisition of data, revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Funding This publication was supported by Award Number UL1TR001876 from the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Its content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences or the National Institutes of Health.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval The project was reviewed by the GW Institutional Review Board and considered ’exempt' (#051827).
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement Unpublished data are not available.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.