Participation In Scholarly Activities Research Articles

Scholarly Activity and Gender of an Applicant for a General Surgery Residency

IntroductionApplying to general surgery residency is undoubtedly a competitive process. Participation in scholarly activity (SCA) has been cited as a criterion when selecting applicants for interview and in the ranking process. This study aims to evaluate the association between gender of applicants to surgery residency and SCA and to characterize trends in SCAs over time. MethodsWe analyzed the SCA of applicants interviewed at a general surgery residency program over 6-interview cycles (2016-2021). Eight SCA categories were included: (1) Poster Presentation, (2) Oral Presentation, (3) Peer-Reviewed (PR) Journal Articles/Abstracts, (4) PR Journal Articles/Abstracts (Other than Published), (5) PR Online Publication, (6) PR Book Chapter, (7) Nonpeer reviewed Online Publication, and (8) Other Articles/Scientific Monograph. ResultsOf a total of 335 interviewed applicants, 288 (86%) had at least one count of SCA. Overall, no difference between male and female applicants was noticed (n = 178, 84.8% versus n = 110, 88%, P = 0.409) and no change in percentage of SCA over the six cycles (P = 0.239). The most reported SCAs were poster presentations (n = 242, 72.2%), oral presentations (n = 159, 47.5%), PR journal articles/abstracts (n = 159, 47.5%). Female applicants have marginally higher median (interquartile range) for SCAs compared to male applicants (5 [3, 8] versus 4 [3, 8], P value 0.272). ConclusionsNo association between gender and SCA among applicants for general surgery residency positions was observed. While more than three-fourths of applicants have at least one SCA, only a small fraction of applicants were published. Students should be made aware of the importance of SCA early in graduate medical education.

The Landscape of Geriatric Fellow Scholarly Activity Participation: Findings From a National Survey of Program Directors.

Introduction As the US population continues to age, there is a critical need for geriatricians to be trained and engaged in research to inform high-quality care for older adults. Our objective was to understand the extent, type, barriers, and facilitators of research training and the attitudes towardresearch training and scholarly activity among Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited US geriatric fellowship programs. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of geriatric fellowship program directors from September to November 2022. Surveys assessing program characteristics, requirements for scholarly activity, director demographics, and director attitudes toward scholarly activity were distributed via email. We used descriptive statistics to assess fellowship scholarly activity requirements, facilitators, and perceived barriers. Results The survey response rate was 35.3% (41/116 programs). Most programs (82.9%) required participation in scholarly activity and provided protected time (73.2%). Definitions of scholarly activities greatly differed among programs. The most common scholarly activity requirements included participation in a scholarly project (70.7%) or local presentation (46.3%). The short duration of fellowship was the most common major barrier, reported by 70.7% of directors. Lastly, 34.1% of directors indicated satisfaction with the quality of research training provided, while 65.9% of directors reported satisfaction with the opportunities provided to participate in scholarly activities. Conclusions Overall, program requirements, facilitators, and perceived barriers to scholarly activity were heterogeneous among US geriatric program directors. Additionally, only about one-third of directors were satisfied with the research training provided. Our future work will compare the attitudes and reported barriers/facilitators ofprogram directorand fellow participantstowardparticipation in scholarly activity.

The Health Sciences Scholarship Strategy: a pilot peer-support initiative for academics

This presentation will report on a pilot initiative being undertaken within a team of university academics, with the aim of promoting peer support, space to develop and improve scholarly activity in all its forms. Scholarship and scholarly teaching are at the core of each university academic’s role (Ling, 2020; Boyer, 1990): ensuring currency, best-practice and skill development in a rapidly changing educational landscape (Matos et al., 2022). Communities of Practice (CoP) and peer support are known to encourage academics to participate in scholarly activities and professional development (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002), arising from Vygotsky’s theory that learning is enhanced when occurring in a group (Vygotsky, 1978). The project design contains many features of a CoP, such as a shared domain and set of practices; places for discussion and group activities (Jakovljevic, Buckley, & Bushney, 2013). With the support of online technologies, this innovative project aims to provide a framework for supporting Health Science (HS) academics in the development of scholarly teaching practices and their capacity to immerse in scholarship from a discipline community perspective. The project also aims to demonstrate strategies for promoting team member research capabilities, development, and outcomes. Designed to sit within the wider institution research and scholarship centres, strategic plans, policies and procedures, the HS Scholarship Strategy is a local, co-creative initiative being formed through on-going and evolving team member participation and feedback. The HS Scholarship Strategy contains two main components – a community group called the HS Scholarly Teaching Think Tank, and the Research Incubator Group. These groups provide an informal space for team members to ideate, plan, progress and support research and scholarly teaching activities. With team members located around Australia, various technologies are being employed to deliver these components synchronously and asynchronously. In addition, four other sub-initiatives are included in the strategy: peer-support workshops; scholarly forums; a scholarly literature club; and an active teaching development project. The main outcomes of interest are participation and engagement in scholarly development activities. The strategy components, including their aims and specific outcomes being measured, will be further described. Given the challenges of teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, knowledge sharing has been made easier using technology, within this project of enhancing scholarly capabilities. Overall, this pilot strategy been designed with the support of the literature on peer support and its potential in developing faculty scholarship, academic culture and the construction of professional identity (Van Schyndel, et al., 2019; Clarke, Hyde, & Drennan, 2013 In alignment with these theoretical bases, this presentation will share early findings and areas for further professional development. There is potential for broader implementation in other teams across the university. This may be of interest to academic and other university teams looking for contextualised, team-based strategies for improving scholarship activities and scholarly teaching outcomes.

Scholarly Activity and Research Training in Urology Residency Programs: Assessment of Current Practice and Barriers

To identify factors associated with effective scholarly activity and identify barriers to research during urology residency. An online survey was sent to 134 urology residency program directors in the United States. The survey assessed program characteristics, available support, and barriers for scholarly activity. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify characteristics of programs in the top quintile for success in scholarly activity. There was a 40% response rate (n=40). The majority of programs (86%) were university affiliated. Nearly all programs (98%) require participation in scholarly activity as a requirement for graduation. There were 3 primary outcomes evaluated: participation in original research, published scholarly activity and presentation of scholarly activity. Factors significantly associated with participation in original research were required research time (P=0.06), lack of experienced faculty (P=0.006), statistical and IRB support (P=0.03, P=0.01), funding (P=0.02), and research curriculum (P=0.006). Factors significantly associated with publication in peer reviewed journals were lack of funding and experienced faculty (P=0.07, P=0.01). Factors significantly associated with presentation of scholarly activity included research director (P=0.05), chairman support (P=0.02), research training (P=0.03), protected time for faculty (P=0.07), and faculty /resident attitudes toward conducting scholarly activity (P=0.08, P=0.02) and resident promotion linked to scholarly activity (P=0.01). Training urology residents in research is essential. Current methods and available resources are variable. Programs should identify resources and barriers that have the greatest impact on resident success in scholarly activity, and may implement changes to improve productivity within their program.

Scholarly Activity in Residency: A Needs Assessment of Challenges and Proposed Solutions

Introduction Resident physician participation in scholarly activity is associated with significant benefits ranging from trainees’ personal development to improved quality of patient care. Residency programs have taken varied approaches to improve resident engagement in scholarship, though interventions have demonstrated mixed results regarding objective measures of scholarly productivity. Concerns regarding waining interest in scholarship amongst internal medicine residents prompted a department-wide needs assessment to evaluate opportunities for scholarship and challenges preventing resident participation. Methods A web-based survey was developed and distributed to Department of Internal Medicine faculty and residents at the PGY2 level or higher and recent graduates within the last year prior to the study. We investigated perceived opportunities for resident scholarship, perceived challenges with resident scholarly activity, preferences regarding scholarly projects, and faculty experiences with mentorship. Descrptive statistics were used to describe survey responses. Results Faculty and trainees shared similar perceptions of inadequate opportunities for resident participation in scholarly activity and endorsed a preference to join ongoing projects early in their course as opposed to starting new projects or joining projects near their completion. Both groups identified lack of resident time as a barrier to resident participation in scholarly activity but faculty were more likely to report lack of resident aptitude for research and lack of faculty time and aptitude for mentorship as challenges. Conclusions Residents and faculty are not aware of all the resources in place to support scholarship opportunities for trainees. Resident and faculty time is a significant barrier to resident scholarship and further efforts are needed to support faculty and trainee collaboration while mitigating challenges which limit the use of currently available resources. Regular curricular assessment is necessary to ensure that trainees and faculty are aware of available resources and that those resources are meeting the departments specific needs.

Advancing knowledge in music therapy

Advancing knowledge in music therapy

The Role of a Writing Center in Academic Writing Socialization of Second Language Graduate Students

Abstract Introduction: The present study aims to investigate second language graduate students’ academic writing socialization in relation to their experiences at writing center in North American higher educational context. The study documents how graduate students are socialized to use academic language in order to participate effectively within their academic communities by employing Weidman, Twale, and Stein’s (2001) framework for Graduate and Professional Student Socialization. Methods: The data is collected through semi-structured interviews with five graduate students who had experience visiting writing center to receive support for their academic writing. The data was analyzed based on the tenets of thematic analysis, which followed an iterative process. Results: It was revealed that second language graduate students’ reasons for visiting the Campus Writing Center included their educational background, field of study, and their first language(s). It was also shown that all participants expected revision on their grammatical errors as well as feedback on global areas such as idea development and organization during their visits. Furthermore, the analysis indicated that the participants gained both positive and negative experiences from the tutoring sessions, while it was found that writing center was not the only resource our participants relied on for the development of their academic writing. Discussion: There are various factors influencing and contributing to second language graduate students’ development of writing socialization within academic community. It is a challenging task for students from other educational and cultural backgrounds to adapt and socialize into new environments, especially in the academic community of higher education. Therefore, the support from writing service and writing development programs/workshops that are tailored to the specific needs of second language graduate students would be one helpful resource to help them go smoothly through the process of second language academic writing socialization. Given that second language graduate students generally benefited from a strong supervision and supportive feedback, and appreciated them as reported in the literature, it is also important to survey international students’ academic enculturation experiences periodically in terms of areas such as writing, speaking and participation in scholarly activities, faculty mentorship and offer feedback-support to overcome issues reported by students. Limitations: The number of participants and the lack of students’ academic text investigation were noted as limitations of the study. It is suggested that further research incorporates various sources of data collection such as tutor’s perspectives and the analysis of participants’ texts. Conclusions: It was concluded that writing center played an important role in academic writing socialization experiences of the participants, and there were various factors influencing and contributing to their academic writing socialization. Overall, it was concluded that the developmental processes into academic writing in second language were non-linear, dynamic, and multimodal.

Can Telehealth Advance Professional Equity for Women in Medicine?

Higher rates of burnout among female physicians as compared with male physicians remain a troubling phenomenon. Achieving gender equity in academic advancement is a critical component of addressing this gap. During the timeframe of childbearing and rearing, enhanced control and flexibility are desired workplace changes and offered by telehealth work modalities. This viewpoint explores the role of telehealth and the remote work environment in optimizing control and flexibility, which can increase participation in academic advancement opportunities and improve female physician burnout. Widespread promotion of remote clinical practice and participation in scholarly activities beyond the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic may be a component of the long-term solution to female physician burnout.

DOES RESTRUCTURING THE RESEARCH CURRICULUM OF ORTHOPEDIC TRAINING PROGRAM AFFECT THE RESEARCH PERFORMANCE? EVIDENCE FROM QATAR

Background: The participation of trainees and faculties in the research is an integral part of postgraduate medical training and education. The educational curriculum of the training program should be structured to support the learning of the trainees scholarly activities, address research barriers, foster a culture of inquiry, and improve their research performance. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education International (ACGME-I) standards include participation in scholarly activities by residents and faculties as an essential requirement of the training program.The possible effects of research-based curriculum after accreditation of postgraduate training program on the research performance was examined in a longitudinal study of the orthopedic training program. Methods: Web-based systematic review for all publicationsfrom our orthopedic training program and only pubmed index publications of other institutional programs before (2009-2013) and after (2014-2018) accreditation was conducted. Data for the type of publications, journal name, impact factors, dates published, orthopedic specialty, level of evidence,and the role of residents and faculties in the authorship were collected.The research academic degree of residents, number of residents applied and matched for a fellowship in North America and/or UK were collected from a residents portfolio. Results: The orthopedics training program published a total of 50 articles between 2009 and 2018, which represented 2% of all other institutional programs publications. There was a significant improvement in the number of publications from three (6%) to 47(94%) articles before and after accreditation, respectively. There were 19(38%) original researches, 17(34%) review articles, 13(26%) case reports, and one letter to the editor. International Orthopedics was the most commonly used journal with ten publications (25%). Most of the publications were in orthopedic trauma with 18 articles (36%), 10(20%) pediatric orthopedics, 7 (14%) foot and ankle and 7(14%) spine articles. The residents were the first author in 50% of publications, and at least one-third were published during their training. Conclusion: This study showed that the development of the structured research based educational curriculumof the residency training program after accreditation helped in enhancing the research performance and publications in our postgraduate training program. Restructuring of the research-based curriculum after accreditation of the program appears to increase the trainees and faculties chances of being an author or co-author of a scientific article.

Quantifying Undergraduate Participation in Scholarly Activities

Quantifying Undergraduate Participation in Scholarly Activities

Developing Future Academic Physicians: the Academic Medicine Scholars Program.

Retention among academic medicine faculty is problematic, and there has been a decline in the number of physicians pursuing careers in academia. The education of future physicians relies upon physicians who pursue careers in academic medicine. Therefore, efforts must be taken to increase the percentage of physicians who conduct research and/or teach medical trainees. Recognizing this need, the New York Institute of Technology College of Osteopathic Medicine (NYITCOM) established the Academic Medicine Scholars Program ("Scholars Program"), which was designed to prepare outstanding osteopathic medical students for a career in academic medicine. Here we aim to determine the extent to which participants in NYITCOM's Scholars Program go on to pursue research and teaching endeavors during their residency and/or fellowship programs. An anonymous survey was administered to participants in the Scholars Program from 2012 through 2018 and asked about the participants' research and teaching experiences at the following time points: during the Scholars Program, residency, and fellowship, if applicable. Participation in the program led to a significant increase in survey respondents' teaching and research skills and an increased participation in scholarly activity as compared with the national average. The results also demonstrated that the program assisted alumni in securing positions in competitive residency and fellowship programs. As residents and fellows, alumni continued to pursue scholarly endeavors, primarily by publishing abstracts and posters, attending both regional and national conferences, and delivering lectures. We are hopeful that other medical schools will take part in producing capable academic medicine physicians by incorporating a similar program into their curriculum.

Predictors and Barriers to Faculty Scholarly Activity in United States Urology Residency Programs

ObjectiveTo determine factors and barriers associated with scholarly activity among faculty members at urology residency programs in the United States. MethodsAn online survey was sent to all 134 urology residency program directors. The survey assessed program characteristics including size, location and definition of scholarly activity. It assessed available support for and barriers to resident scholarly activity, faculty participation in scholarly activity and mentorship of residents. Linear regression analysis was used. ResultsWe had a 40% response rate (N = 40). Faculty attitudes toward conducting scholarly activity (P < .001) and lack of a research curriculum (P = .05) were barriers to the outcome ‘participation in scholarly activity’. Faculty attitudes toward conducting scholarly activity was also a barrier to the outcomes ‘mentorship of residents’ (P = .004) and ‘publication of at least 1 paper’ (P = .004). Available statistician was positively associated with the outcomes ‘publications’ (P = .062) and ‘presentations’ (P = .032). A minimum requirement of a local presentation (P=0.04) and chairman support (P = .015) were positively associated with the outcome ‘presentation at a conference.’ ConclusionTraining residents in research matters for the resident, the institution and future generations of surgeon scientists. Higher levels of faculty scholarly activity were associated with a minimum requirement for residents to submit a manuscript for publication, strong chairman support for resident research, and the availability of a statistician. A common barrier to faculty scholarly activity, publications, and resident mentorship was faculty attitudes toward resident scholarly activity. Urology residency programs seeking to prioritize scholarly activity among faculty should consider these factors.

The Impact of Mentoring Our Future Leaders: 12 Years of the Astct Clinical Research Training Course

The ASTCT Clinical Research Training Course (CRTC) is designed to build physician capacity and retain trainees/junior faculty in academic cell therapy careers. Participation is on a competitive basis. Applicants submit a clinical study proposal, career plan, CV and mentor letter of support. Each year 10-12 scholars join ∼10 senior faculty including statistician(s) for 5 days of lectures, small group work developing their protocols, career guidance and mentoring. We reviewed the course to evaluate whether it was meeting its mission. Scholars were invited to participate in an online survey and submit their cv. Scholars were asked to rate the impact of the course on their career. Data was extracted from CVs to measure academic productivity. <b>Results:</b> 107/146 (73%) of the scholars responded: 54% female, 59% Caucasian, 57% trainees and 61% trained in adult hematology (Table1). Responses to questions regarding the impact of the course on career choice and professional development indicated a strong positive impact of the course on scholars (Table 2). Current employment, participation in scholarly activities and productivity of former scholars demonstrated engagement in clinical research (65% of scholars >25% FTE in research), research in cellular therapy (89%), peer review (75%), and other academic activities. While scholars from the earlier cohort (2007-2012) had numerically more grants and publications and more senior academic appointments than the early cohort (2013-18), both cohorts were active in all productivity areas (Table 3). Conclusion: The ASTCT CRTC has positively contributed to retention of trainees and junior faculty in academic cellular therapy careers. The ASTCT should continue to support the CRTC and consider a second course to expand the opportunity to a larger number of scholars.

Spicing up Scholarly Productivity: Impact of a Structured Resident Research Program

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether implementation of a structured resident research program improved scholarly productivity at an academic obstetrics and gynecology (OB-GYN) program. BACKGROUND: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires resident participation in scholarly activity. Since the 1970s, OB-GYN residents at University of Colorado (CU) have been required to complete a research project. Starting with the graduating class of 2016, the CU OB-GYN program appointed two Assistant Program Directors of Resident Research who instituted a formalized research program including didactics, timelines, detailed protocol review, an expectation of manuscript submission, and an internal grant funding mechanism. METHODS: We compared scholarly productivity related to the required resident research projects for the graduating classes of 2012-2014 (before program implementation) and 2016-2018 (after implementation). Two investigators independently searched for abstracts presented at national meetings, grants received, and publications using PubMed and Google search engines. We also confirmed with the resident or mentor. We compared the proportion of residents who had an accepted abstract or manuscript for their research projects using Fisher’s exact test. RESULTS: Fifty-four residents were included; 27 before and 27 after program implementation. The proportion of residents who had oral presentations at a national meeting remained the same (11%), whereas those with an accepted poster presentation increased from 44% to 89% (p=0.001). The proportion who had manuscript publication increased from 26% to 59% (p=0.03). DISCUSSION: A formalized, structured research curriculum resulted in improved scholarly productivity. Our experience can guide other programs faced with the challenge of improving resident scholarly activity and output.

21. ESTABLISHING THE RESIDENT ACADEMIC PROJECT TO INCREASE SCHOLASTIC ACTIVITY AMONG PEDIATRIC RESIDENTS

Introduction Participation in scholarly activity is a critical element of clinicians’ training. Required research projects are becoming increasingly more common among medical schools and residency programs. The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) pediatric residency program aims to increase research participation among its residents by launching and evaluating a new Resident Academic Project (RAP Project). Methods The RAP Project will be initiated starting with the UCSD pediatric residency class of 2021. The RAP Project is introduced during the fall of their first year. In the spring of their first year, residents will attend an afternoon-long research session that will connect them to potential mentors within each available research area (basic science, clinical, quality improvement (QI), education, and advocacy/global health research). Residents will select a project chair and two committee members and, with the help of their chosen mentor, develop a research proposal. Proposals will be approved by each trainee's research committee as well as the RAP oversight board by the beginning of their second year of residency. Residents will complete their project within the two months prior to graduation, submitting a yearly update at the end of their second year. Residents will present their work at an annual research day at the end of residency. Conclusions A pediatric and adult neurology residency program found that requiring residents to participate in mentored projects aimed at producing peer-reviewed publications or conference presentations increased research productivity among residents as well as expanded its pool of research mentors. 1 We will use baseline data from previous residency classes to determine if the Resident Academic Project increases scholastic activity (peer-reviewed publications, conference participation, ongoing projects) among UCSD pediatric residents and if it increases residents’ satisfaction with their research opportunities during training. We will also create a database of research opportunities, funding sources, and mentors to continue to make the scholastic experience among pediatric residents more robust.

Research involvement and obstacles among trainees enrolled in a pediatric residency program in Saudi Arabia.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate pediatric residents' involvement in research and their attitudes toward potential barriers to conducting research.MethodsThis cross-sectional survey was conducted in February 2017 and targeted residents enrolled in the Saudi Pediatric Residency Program. An online self-administered questionnaire was designed to assess residents' involvement in different domains of scholarly activity and their perception of barriers to research. All items used a five-point Likert-type scale with response options varying depending on the question. The relative importance index (RII) approach was used to analyze the relative contribution of each indicator to its main theme.ResultsA total of 314 pediatric residents agreed to complete the survey. Of these, 168 (53.5%) were female. Residents rated their involvement in all aspects of research as low. The top-ranked item was residents' participation in data collection for research (mean [standard deviation, SD] rating, 2.74 [1.3]; RII, 54.2%), followed by residents' participation in a structured literature review of a topic (mean [SD] rating, 2.6 [1.3]; RII, 52.1%). The lowest-rated items were residents' involvement in manuscript writing (mean [SD] rating, 2.3 [1.24]; RII, 46.1%) and their participation in statistical analysis (mean [SD] rating, 1.23 [1.21]; RII, 44.5%). The residents ranked the lack of dedicated time as the most significant barrier to their participation in scholarly activities (mean [SD] rating, 3.44 [1.3]; RII, 68.83%). Conversely, they ranked the lack of interest as the lowest barrier to research participation (mean [SD] rating, 2.85 [1.2]; RII, 56.96%)ConclusionOverall, pediatric residents rated their involvement in all aspects of research as low, especially in manuscript writing and statistical analysis. These findings suggest the need to provide support for the development of a mentoring program as well as to develop a robust and longitudinal research curriculum for the pediatric residency program to encourage the involvement of trainees in research.

Promoting Scholarship at Regional Medical Campuses

Multiple regional medical campuses (RMCs) have been established in North America as part of the effort to train physicians in locations geographically removed from the main medical school campus. RMCs may vary in size, geographic location and mission from the main campus, but scholarly activity by faculty and students is expected and should be promoted on all campuses. If the definition of scholarship is limited to research demonstrated by publication, and academic recognition and advancement is largely based on this criterion, faculty at the RMC who fail to participate may be at a disadvantage. Thus, in addition to expanding research opportunities at the RMC, it is argued that the definition of scholarship needs to be expanded to recognize the accomplishments of RMC faculty. RMC students must also be introduced to biomedical research principles and provided opportunities to engage in scholarly pursuits. Documented participation in scholarly activity may be necessary to make the student more competitive for residency positions. The authors review an expanded definition of scholarship, present an approach to promote faculty and student scholarship, and describe achievable options for scholarly activity on the RMC.

CanMEDS scholars: A national survey on urology residents' attitudes towards research during training.

Participation in scholarly activity is an important tenet of residency training and is firmly entrenched in Canada since the introduction of CanMEDS roles by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons. As Canadian residency programs transition to competency-based training, it will remain important to understand how to best implement and encourage scholarly pursuits among resident trainees. The objective of this study was to understand the experiences, attitudes, and barriers that surgical residents face when pursuing research during their training. An anonymous, cross-sectional, self-report questionnaire was administered to chief residents of all English-speaking urology programs in Canada in 2015. Questions were open- and close-ended, including an agreement score based on a five-point Likert scale. Questions addressed residents' involvement in and attitudes towards research, as well as their perceptions of the utility of research involvement during training. The residents were also asked about the support they received and potential areas to improve the attainment of this competency. Descriptive and correlative statistics were used to analyze the responses. There was a 100% overall response rate to the questionnaire. This study revealed that Canadian urology residents have a high rate of participation in scholarly work, with the vast majority (94%) publishing at least one manuscript with a mean of four papers. Despite this, there appeared to be significant variation in the respondent's experiences, including protected time for research. Furthermore, many residents appeared unconvinced of the importance of research involvement, with only 51% agreement that participation was important to their overall training. As well, a significant number of residents reported largely external, rather than internal, motivations for research participation, such as attaining a preferred fellowship (66% agreement). While the majority of respondents felt (66% agreement) that the scholar role was important in residency training, it would appear that significant barriers, including time and mentorship, limited the effectiveness of research participation to gain those competencies. The results of this self-report survey outline the significant differences in attitudes and experience towards mandatory research as a component of scholarship in Canadian urology training programs. As postgraduate medical education evolves, particularly with the uptake of competency-based medical education, programs and residents will need to address the motives and barriers to better foster academic pursuits during urology training.

Scholarly Activity Training: A National Survey of Residents and Program Directors Through APPD LEARN (Research Abstract)

Participation in scholarly activity (SA) is an ACGME requirement. Yet, our previous research with program directors (PDs) suggests that the current state of SA training is widely variable and suboptimal. To help programs meet ACGME requirements in a more consistent, effective way, it is critical to understand resident perspectives.

Increasing Scholarly Activity Productivity During Residency: A Systematic Review.

Although resident participation in scholarly activity is mandated by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, programmatic factors associated with success are not defined. This systematic review's objective was to determine which interventions are effective in increasing resident scholarly activity productivity (RSAP), as measured by participation in scholarly activity, presentations, or publications. The PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ERIC databases were searched through October 2013. English-language articles evaluating interventions to increase RSAP in U.S. or Canadian residency programs were included, without date limits. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Of the 6,248 records screened, 80 studies underwent data abstraction. Twenty-six described outcomes without a comparison group, leaving 54 studies representing 13 medical and surgical specialties. Interventions included required scholarly activity participation, protected research time, research curricula, research directors, dedicated research days, and research tracks. Focusing on the 35 studies reporting statistical analysis, RSAP was associated with all interventions. There were some differences in intervention effectiveness between medical and surgical specialties. Interventions, including protected time, research curricula, or specialized research tracks, generally result in increased participation in scholarly activity in residency programs, with mixed effects on resident presentations or publications. In many studies, interventions were bundled, suggesting that programs may need to provide increased structure and rigor through multiple pathways. The findings highlight the need for a clear definition of resident scholarly activity success aligned specifically to individual program and resident aims.