Improving the Educational Opportunities of Reproductive Biologists and Reproductive Endocrinologists in Training.

Abstract

The field of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility (REI) has benefited dramatically from advances made by reproductive biologists in non-human species. Major advances currently applied to overcome human reproductive difficulties were developed by reproductive biologists who frequently participate in the Society for the Study of Reproduction (SSR). The reproductive endocrinologists in training who care for humans could benefit from early interaction with reproductive biologists, and reproductive biologists in training working in non-human species could benefit conversely. While the opportunity to interact exists through SSR, I hypothesized that REI fellows were more likely to participate through presentation of abstracts at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) compared with SSR. I cross-referenced the list of fellows generated from fellow participation with the Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility with the published abstract lists of SSR from 2001 through 2007. For comparison, I made a similar comparison with the abstract list from ASRM for 2005. I found that overall participation of REI fellows at ASRM in 2005 was 70.4% of eligible fellows (81/115), with higher participation among 1st year fellows (84%, 37/44) compared with 2nd year and 3rd year fellows (64% and 59%, respectively). REI fellow participation in SSR between the years of 2001 and 2007 was 1.2% ± 0.7% of eligible fellows/year (7/659 overall; range 0-2.3%). All REI fellow participants were 2nd year fellows, and no fellow participated in SSR presentations more than once. Specifically comparing the year 2005, 70.4% of eligible REI fellows participated in ASRM, while 0% of eligible REI fellows participated in SSR (÷2; p<0.00001). These results demonstrate that, for the years 2001 through 2007, REI fellows rarely participated in SSR. In the absence of participation during training, the likelihood of de novo participation once the reproductive endocrinologists are in practice is unlikely. It is currently unknown to what extent reproductive biologists in training participate at ASRM. Given the significant opportunity that exists with SSR, the lack of participation by REI fellows could be due to a lack of awareness or due to intimidation of participating in a basic science meeting. However, given the great opportunity to improve the interaction between reproductive endocrinologists and reproductive biologists, I have proposed an ASRM/SSR Emissary Program. This program would provide travel support for up to three REI fellows to attend SSR, as well as travel support for up to three post-doctoral reproductive biologists to attend ASRM. These scholars would be coordinated, such that the reproductive biologists would assist the reproductive endocrinologists in understanding and appreciating the SSR, while the reproductive endocrinologists would do the same for the reproductive biologists at ASRM. The participants would be required to submit abstracts to the meeting where travel was provided, and the program would be organized by both ASRM and SSR faculty. The benefits of exposure to faculty and enthusiastic new peers, as well as the opportunities for long-term collaboration are additional highlights. If you are interested in participating, please contact me at catheriw@mail.nih.gov.