Scholarly Activity Training During Residency: Are We Hitting the Mark? A National Assessment of Pediatric Residents

Abstract

ObjectiveParticipation in scholarly activity (SA) is an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirement. Our previous research with program directors (PDs) suggests that pediatric SA training is variable and suboptimal. To help programs better meet requirements, our objective was to understand the resident perspective regarding SA training, including factors associated with satisfaction and productivity. MethodsWe conducted cross-sectional surveys of second- and third-year pediatric residents and PDs at 22 diverse programs in 2016. Surveys assessed resident demographics, career intentions, program characteristics, beliefs, barriers, satisfaction, and productivity, defined as SA accepted at a regional or national meeting, for publication, or grant funding. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression. ResultsA total of 464 (60.2%) of 771 residents and 22 PDs (100%) responded. Most residents believed that residents should participate in SA (n = 380, 81.9%). However, only 37.9% (n = 175) were extremely or very satisfied with their training. Residents who reported that training to conduct research (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–3.5), availability of a research curriculum (AOR = 1.9, 95% CI 1.2–3.1), and adequate faculty mentorship (AOR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.6–4.1) were not barriers were more satisfied. Protected time was associated with satisfaction (AOR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.1–2.7). A total of 43.8% of residents (n = 203) were productive. Productivity was associated with future plans to conduct research (AOR = 3.3, 95% CI 2.1–5.1). ConclusionsResidents believe SA training is important. Dedicated program infrastructure, protected time, and adequate mentorship appear to be crucial to improving quality perceptions.