Generation Of Physician-scientists Research Articles

Editorial introductions.

Editorial introductions.

Susan S. Smyth (1965-2022).

Susan S. Smyth (1965-2022).

Early introduction of African medical students into scientific research: a viewpoint and literature review of the importance, barriers, and proposed solutions

The involvement of medical students in scientific research has been advocated recently in medical education. With the voices calling for evidence-based practice, scientific research skills emerge as a critical factor in preparing future generations of physician-scientists. However, Africa is a developing continent with limited financial resources, economic problems, conflicts, and political instabilities that slow the developments in medical education. The involvement of medical students of Africa in scientific research has taken a new shape recently with the formulation of student interest groups, collaboration based on personal communications, and non-governmental research societies. The present review highlights the importance, challenges, and solutions to involve African medical students in scientific research.

Perinatal Research Society's Young Investigator Workshop Prepares the Next Generation of Investigators.

Sustaining impactful research within the field of perinatal biology requires training and retention of the next generations of physician-scientists and basic-scientists. Professional societies such as the Perinatal Research Society (PRS) have a unique role to play in training and retention of perinatal biologists. Here we report outcomes for an innovative Young Investigator Training Workshop created for the PRS. The PRS Workshop uses immersive, active-writing, and active-oral presentation design, with one-on-one feedback from NIH-funded faculty-mentors drawn from the PRS membership. Young investigator data were collected by anonymous surveys of young investigators, NIH RePORTER, and individual young investigator follow-up. Ninety-seven young investigators attended the Workshops over the period 2013-2018. Young investigators were physician- (73%) and PhD- (27%) scientists at the rank of clinical fellow/postdoctoral fellow (27%) or instructor/assistant professor (73%). Participation by underrepresented minority (URM) young investigators was 14%. Young investigators received NIH and non-NIH funding, with 80% of young investigators receiving new funding since the Workshop that they attended. NIH funding was received by 31% of young investigators in the form of K-series awards, R01 equivalents, and other NIH awards. In conclusion, our PRS young investigator Workshop serves as a model to facilitate training of emerging physician- and basic-scientists by scientific societies.

More than grit: growing and sustaining physician-scientists in obstetrics and gynecology

Obstetricians know the statistics-1 out of every 10 babies is born premature; preeclampsia affects 1 in 25 pregnant people; the United States has the highest rate of maternal mortality in the developed world. Yet, physicians and scientists still do not fully understand the biology of normal pregnancy, letalone what causes these complications. Obstetrics and gynecology-trained physician-scientists are uniquely positioned to fill critical knowledge gaps by addressing clinically-relevant problems through fundamental research and interpreting insights from basic and translational studies in the clinical context. Within our specialty, however, physician-scientists are relatively uncommon. Inadequate guidance, lack of support and community, and structural barriers deter fellows and early stage faculty from pursuing the physician-scientist track. One approach to help cultivate the next generation of physician-scientists in obstetrics and gynecology is to demystify the process and address the common barriers that contribute to the attrition of early stage investigators. Here, we review major challenges and propose potential pathways forward in the areas of mentorship, obtaining protected research time and resources, and ensuring diversity, equity, and inclusion, from our perspective as early stage investigators in maternal-fetal medicine. We discuss the roles of early stage investigators and leaders at the institutional and national level in the collective effort to retain and grow our physician-scientist workforce. We aim to provide a framework for early stage investigators initiating their research careers and a starting point for discussion with academic stakeholders. We cannot afford to lose the valuable contributions of talented individuals due to modifiable factors or forfeit our voices as advocates for the issues that impact pregnant populations.

A nationwide assessment of perceptions of research-intense academic careers among predoctoral MD and MD-PhD trainees.

While previous studies have described career outcomes of physician-scientist trainees after graduation, trainee perceptions of research-intensive career pathways remain unclear. This study sought to identify the perceived interests, factors, and challenges associated with academic and research careers among predoctoral MD trainees, MD trainees with research-intense (>50%) career intentions (MD-RI), and MD-PhD trainees. A 70-question survey was administered to 16,418 trainees at 32 academic medical centers from September 2012 to December 2014. MD vs. MD-RI (>50% research intentions) vs. MD-PhD trainee responses were compared by chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify variables associated with academic and research career intentions. There were 4433 respondents (27% response rate), including 2625 MD (64%), 653 MD-RI (15%), and 856 MD-PhD (21%) trainees. MD-PhDs were most interested in pursuing academia (85.8%), followed by MD-RIs (57.3%) and MDs (31.2%). Translational research was the primary career intention for MD-PhD trainees (42.9%). Clinical duties were the primary career intention for MD-RIs (51.9%) and MDs (84.2%). While 39.8% of MD-PhD respondents identified opportunities for research as the most important career selection factor, only 12.9% of MD-RI and 0.5% of MD respondents shared this perspective. Interest in basic research, translational research, clinical research, education, and the ability to identify a mentor were each independently associated with academic career intentions by multivariate regression. Predoctoral MD, MD-RI, and MD-PhD trainees are unique cohorts with different perceptions and interests toward academic and research careers. Understanding these differences may help to guide efforts to mentor the next generation of physician-scientists.

The national MD-PhD program outcomes study: Relationships between medical specialty, training duration, research effort, and career paths.

MD-PhD programs were established in the 1950s as a new curriculum for training physician-scientists. Since then, the number of programs has grown considerably; however, concerns about the health of the US physician-scientist workforce have grown, as well. The largest attempt to date to assess whether MD-PhD programs are fulfilling their mission was the national MD-PhD program outcomes study, which was released as an American Association of Medical Colleges report in 2018. That study gathered information on 10,591 graduates of 80 MD-PhD programs over 50 years and concluded that most graduates have followed careers consistent with their training. Here, we provide additional analysis, drawing on survey data provided by 64.1% of alumni (75.9% of alumni with valid email addresses), plus program-supplied current workplace data for survey nonresponders to examine the relationships between medical specialty choices, training duration, research effort, and success in obtaining research funding. The results show that residency choices affect critical aspects of the physician-scientist career path, including where graduates work, how long it takes them to obtain an independent appointment in academia, and the amount of their professional time that is devoted to research. Entrants into MD-PhD programs are older, on average, now than when the programs were first established and are taking longer to graduate and complete postgraduate training. Although we found a positive relationship between professional effort devoted to research and the likelihood of having research funding, we found little evidence that the increase in training duration produces an increase in subsequent research effort. These data should provide both guidance for anyone considering this career path and insights for those who train and hire the next generation of physician-scientists.

Generations of physician-scientists.

Generations of physician-scientists.

The Next Generation of Physician-Scientists: Adapting to Academic Cardiology in the 21st Century

More than 3 decades ago, Wyngaarden and Gill first warned of the challenges facing physician-scientists in their seminal papers “The Clinical Investigator as an Endangered Species” and “The End of the Physician-Scientist.” In the years since these papers were published, there has been expansion of stage I-II preclinical research focusing on discovery and exploratory studies. Expansion has often come at the expense of physician-scientists whose traditional role has been to bridge the gap between early preclinical research (stage I-II) and clinical trials (stage IV). Consequently, a paradigm shift has occurred, and increasing pressure has been placed on physician-scientists to choose between clinical practice and fundamental research. This shift is particularly concerning in the field of cardiovascular medicine, where the ubiquitous nature and clinical significance of cardiovascular disease make the role of the translational scientist essential. The challenges facing academic cardiologists have then further been amplified by the necessity not only to maintain clinical competence but also to maintain competence in highly technical fields with rapidly advancing technology. Potential solutions to these problems include increasing support from postgraduate training programs, increased participation of trainees in physician-scientist development programs, and recognition of the pivotal role physician-scientists play in translational research by funding agencies. Although the physician-scientist remains an endangered species, multifaceted solutions with a focus on collaboration among institutions, training programs, and funding agencies have the potential to maximize efficiency in biomedical research and successfully translate scientific discoveries from bench to bedside.

Using an Extracurricular Honors Program to Engage Future Physicians Into Scientific Research in Early Stages of Medical Training

Physician-scientists are urgently needed to make progress in the dynamic world of medical healthcare. Currently, there is a worldwide shortage in physicians pursuing a scientific career. Actively engaging students in research in early stages of medical training could help to direct students towards a scientific career and contribute to creating the next generation of physician-scientists. Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) implemented an extracurricular Honors program with a fundamental orientation towards research. The program starts in the second year of medical training and is comprised of four different tracks in order to attract multiple types of students with different interests. All four tracks offer students scholarly experiences, but differ in content and amount of provided structure. The LUMC Honors program has a clear goal to develop future physician-scientists, and combined with its unique multiple-track model, the program accommodates about 70 students (25%) each year. The number of students in the program has grown and students’ experiences are positive.

On developing a thesis for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility fellowship: a case study of ultra-low (2%) oxygen tension for extended culture of human embryos.

Fellows in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility training are expected to complete 18months of clinical, basic, or epidemiological research. The goal of this research is not only to provide the basis for the thesis section of the oral board exam but also to spark interest in reproductive medicine research and to provide the next generation of physician-scientists with a foundational experience in research design and implementation. Incoming fellows often have varying degrees of training in research methodology and, likewise, different career goals. Ideally, selection of a thesis topic and mentor should be geared toward defining an "answerable" question and building a practical skill set for future investigation. This contribution to the JARG Young Investigator's Forum revisits the steps of the scientific method through the lens of one recently graduated fellow and his project aimed to test the hypothesis that "sequential oxygen exposure (5% from days 1 to 3, then 2% from days 3 to 5) improves blastocyst yield and quality compared to continuous exposure to 5% oxygen among human preimplantation embryos."

Medical student perceptions of research and research-orientated careers: An international questionnaire study

Background: Engaging and inspiring the next generation of physician-scientists at an early stage is recognised as key to ensure the future of medical research. However, little is known about medical student perceptions of research.Objectives: We attempted to ascertain perceptions of research and research-orientated careers from medical students studying in different countries.Methods: An online questionnaire was developed, piloted, and promoted to medical students in various countries.Results: 1625 responses were collected from 38 countries. Analysis was restricted to data collected from countries with >100 responses (n = 890). Less than half the respondents felt their medical school provided adequate research training. Key perceived barriers to research participation as a student included lack of time and difficulty finding mentors or projects. A significant gender disparity existed in research ambitions of students with females desiring less research involvement. The importance of barriers and satisfaction with research training differed significantly between countries.Conclusions: Students perceive a number of key barriers to research involvement and pursuit of research-orientated careers. Programmes designed to engage students with research should focus on overcoming identified barriers. Greater effort is needed to engage female students who report more significant barriers and less desire to follow research-orientated careers.

Inspiring the next generation of physician-scientists.

As academic physician-scientists, one of the most important things we do is mentor young trainee-scientists. There obviously is no one right way to mentor or a set of rules one can follow; it's a very personal matter, and very much depends on one's personality. For much of my career, I gave very little thought as to how I mentored my trainees or to whether I was any good at it. Like many investigators, perhaps, I was just too busy with the daily activities of research to consider how I was guiding my students. Here, I take a look back and reflect on my experiences as a mentor and the factors that I believe contribute to the success of trainees as independent scientists.

Mentoring the next generation of physician-scientists in Japan: a cross-sectional survey of mentees in six academic medical centers.

BackgroundPhysician-scientists play key roles in biomedical research across the globe, yet prior studies have found that it is increasingly difficult to recruit and retain physician-scientists in research careers. Access to quality research mentorship may help to ameliorate this problem in the U.S., but there is virtually no information on mentoring in academic medicine in Japan. We conducted a survey to determine the availability and quality of mentoring relationships for trainee physician-scientists in Japan.MethodsWe surveyed 1700 physician-scientists in post-graduate research training programs in 6 academic medical centers in Japan about mentorship characteristics, mentee perceptions of the mentoring relationship, and attitudes about career development.ResultsA total of 683 potential physician-scientist mentees completed the survey. Most reported that they had a departmental mentor (91%) with whom they met at least once a month; 48% reported that they were very satisfied with the mentoring available to them. Mentoring pairs were usually initiated by the mentor (85% of the time); respondents identified translational research skills (55%) and grant writing (50%) as unmet needs. Mentoring concerning long-term career planning was significantly associated with the intention to pursue research careers, however this was also identified by some mentees as an unmet need (35% desired assistance; 15% reported receiving it).ConclusionsMore emphasis and formal training in career mentorship may help to support Japanese physician-scientist mentees to develop a sense of self-efficacy to pursue and stay in research careers.

Association of learning styles with research self-efficacy: study of short-term research training program for medical students.

With a growing need for developing future physician scientists, identifying characteristics of medical students who are likely to benefit from research training programs is important. This study assessed if specific learning styles of medical students, participating in federally funded short-term research training programs, were associated with research self-efficacy, a potential predictor of research career success. Seventy-five first-year medical students from 28 medical schools, selected to participate in two competitive NIH-supported summer programs for research training in aging, completed rating scales to evaluate learning styles at baseline, and research self-efficacy before and after training. We examined associations of individual learning styles (visual-verbal, sequential-global, sensing-intuitive, and active-reflective) with students' gender, ranking of medical school, and research self-efficacy. Research self-efficacy improved significantly following the training programs. Students with a verbal learning style reported significantly greater research self-efficacy at baseline, while visual, sequential, and intuitive learners demonstrated significantly greater increases in research self-efficacy from baseline to posttraining. No significant relationships were found between learning styles and students' gender or ranking of their medical school. Assessments of learning styles may provide useful information to guide future training endeavors aimed at developing the next generation of physician-scientists.

NIH Career Development Awards in Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions: distinguishing characteristics of top performing sites.

To identify and disseminate the organizational characteristics of "top performing" National Institute of Health (NIH) Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) institutions in regards to career development, using the number of new K awards received per year to rank institutions and comparing these with non-CTSA institutions. The authors analyzed the organizational characteristics of all 61 CTSA institutions from 2006 to 2013 using the American Association of Medical Colleges Organizational Characteristics Database and K Award funding details using NIH RePORT. Five of the "top 10 performing" institutions are in the western region, and six out of the ten are public schools. Three of the "top 10 performing" institutions receive most of their K awards through two funding mechanisms-the K08 (mentored clinical scientist research award) and K23 (mentored patient-oriented research career development awards). Notably, these three institutions lack a KL2 program. The CTSA network of institutions is committed to developing the next generation of physician scientists in order to meet the pressing health needs of society. Educators and evaluators within this network may need to provide training to junior investigators beyond the traditional KL2 programs in order to advance their career development as physician scientists and clinical translational researchers.

Engaging medical students in research: reaching out to the next generation of physician-scientists.

The authors describe a multifaceted educational training approach aimed at increasing medical student involvement in psychiatric research. A description of the initiative is provided, including the rationale and expected impact of each component. Medical student involvement in research projects has increased steadily since implementation. This applies to summer research projects as well as elective research rotations for senior medical students. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of students who participate in research continue to engage in research activities following completion of the program (e.g., through additional research participation, conference presentations). A proactive and well-organized approach to encouraging medical student participation in research can increase the number of students who choose to engage in a research and may ultimately help increase the number of physician-scientists.

Professor Emeritus Maxime Seligmann (1927-2010)

European Journal of ImmunologyVolume 40, Issue 12 p. 3301-3301 News and EFISFree Access Professor Emeritus Maxime Seligmann (1927–2010) First published: 25 November 2010 https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.201090066AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Maxime Seligmann passed away on April, 26, 2010. He was an outstanding French physician-scientist who has influenced the development of modern immunology over the past fifty years and was President of the French Society for Immunology from 1984 to 1988. Born in 1927, he completed his medical education at the Faculty of Medicine at Paris University, becoming a pediatrician and hematologist. His scientific career and interest in immunology began at the Pasteur Institute in Dr. Grabar's laboratory before moving in 1957 to work at the Saint-Louis hospital in Paris; there Maxime Seligmann headed both a clinical immunology department and a research laboratory supported by INSERM, Paris 7 University and CNRS. More recently, he contributed to the fight against the HIV epidemic at the Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris and ANRS. During the later stages of his career, he was a member of the French National Ethics committee. As a physician-scientist, Maxime Seligmann was insightful and brillant, always starting from clinical observations to understand fundamental immunology. His first groundbreaking work was the identification of antibodies to DNA in lupus patients in 1957 1. This was a provocative finding that raised countless issues and investigations over the years. Thereafter, his work dealt with a breath of immuno-hematological issues, with numerous contributions to the fields of monoclonal immunoglobulins and lymphoproliferative diseases. The list of innovative findings include the idiotypic nature and antibody activity of monoclonal immunoglobulins 2-5, the genetic susceptibility to Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (a seminal observation in 1967) 6, the monoclonal nature of lymphoid malignancies, the pathophysiology of non-secretory and light chain myelomas, and the first description of T-cell malignancies 7-9. The discovery of α heavy chain disease 10 remained a central focus of Maxime Seligmann's work. Beyond the description of the clinical, cellular and molecular characteristics of the disease, he emphazised its unique epidemiological features, pointing to the potential triggering role of intestinal micro-organisms; in fact, antibiotics turned out to be of therapeutic value. More broadly, his research interests extended to several aspects of autoimmunity and immunodeficiencies, areas for which he was a WHO expert. These achievements were shared with many colleagues around the world; Maxime Seligmann was an invaluable discussant at internationl conferences with exchanges of thoughts, material and elaboration regarding theoretical models for B and T lymphocyte homeostasis. Maxime Seligmann was also a superb teacher, running many medical and scientific courses. Indeed he remains an inspiring model for several generations of physician-scientists. He was dedicated to his faculty duties and one personnal achievement was the recognition of immunology, both medical and biological, as a medical specialty. In the early 1980s Maxime Seligmann became a French-government adviser proposing changes to the medical course in part to facilitate the development of clinical investigation, which he thought to be an endangered science. Maxime Seligmann also served as an Executive Committee member of the European Journal of Immunology for 17 years (1975–1991). This task was, as usual, accomplished with integrity and thoughtfulness. We shall all miss him. Jean-Claude Brouet Department of Immunology, Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris References 1Seligmann, M., Vox Sang. 1957. 2: 270– 282. 2Seligmann, M. et al., Nature 1968. 220: 711– 712. 3Hurez, D. et al., J. Immunol. 1968. 100: 69– 79. 4Seligmann, M. et al., Science 1966. 154: 790– 791. 5Preud'homme, J. L. and Seligmann, M., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1972. 69: 2132– 2135. 6Seligmann, M. et al., Am. J. Med. 1967. 43: 66– 83. 7Brouet, J. C. et al., New Engl. J. Med. 1973. 289: 341– 344. 8Salmon, S. E. and Seligmann, M., Lancet 1974. ii: 1230– 1233. 9Seligmann, M., Neoplasias and B cell precursors. Nature 1979. 279: 578. 10Seligmann, M. et al., Science 1968. 162: 1396– 1397. Volume40, Issue12December 2010Pages 3301-3301 ReferencesRelatedInformation

University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Improving Adolescent and Young Adult Health — Training the Next Generation of Physician Scientists in Transdisciplinary Research

To address the critical shortage of physician scientists in the field of adolescent medicine, a conference of academic leaders and representatives from foundations, National Institutes of Health, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, and the American Board of Pediatrics was convened to discuss training in transdisciplinary research, facilitators and barriers of successful career trajectories, models of training, and mentorship. The following eight recommendations were made to improve training and career development: incorporate more teaching and mentoring on adolescent health research in medical schools; explore opportunities and electives to enhance clinical and research training of residents in adolescent health; broaden educational goals for Adolescent Medicine fellowship research training and develop an intensive transdisciplinary research track; redesign the career pathway for the development of faculty physician scientists transitioning from fellowship to faculty positions; expand formal collaborations between Leadership Education in Adolescent Health/other Adolescent Medicine Fellowship Programs and federal, foundation, and institutional programs; develop research forums at national meetings and opportunities for critical feedback and mentoring across programs; educate Institutional Review Boards about special requirements for high quality adolescent health research; and address the trainee and faculty career development issues specific to women and minorities to enhance opportunities for academic success.