Resident Research Research Articles

Editorial Comment on "PubMed-Indexed Research Productivity of Urology Applicants and Residents: Does Medical Student Research Productivity Predict Resident Research or Pursuit of an Academic Career?"

Editorial Comment on "PubMed-Indexed Research Productivity of Urology Applicants and Residents: Does Medical Student Research Productivity Predict Resident Research or Pursuit of an Academic Career?"

05 The experience of youth on the waitlist for gender-affirming care in Manitoba

Abstract Background Waitlist times are often two years for youth to be seen for initial assessment for gender-affirming hormone therapy in Manitoba, Canada. It is well known that transgender youth awaiting hormone therapy have high rates of mental health challenges, including depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Accessing care that is affirming and supportive, including primary care and counselling, can also be a challenge. Objectives The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of youth and their caregivers on the waitlist for the Winnipeg, Manitoba-based Gender Diversity Affirmation and Action for Youth (GDAAY) clinic, the provincial transgender health clinic. Specifically, we were interested in what community based resources youth were accessing, mental health impacts, and suggestions for improvements. Design/Methods Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted. Youth aged 14-17 years on the waitlist for 12-24 months for gender-affirming hormone therapy assessment and their caregivers were recruited. Separate interviews were conducted for youth and their caregivers. All interviews were virtual, recorded, and transcribed prior to thematic analysis. Results Youth (n=8) and caregivers (n=9) described barriers to supported transition. The first theme, “In a Black Hole” describes frustration and disappointment with the lack of regular ongoing communications from GDAAY. It also extends to the mental health challenges faced by youth and caregivers alike. Anxiety and self-harm were consistently described, with caregivers volunteering more information on self-harm and suicidality than youth. Youth described dysphoria and two youth found alternative providers for hormone therapy while on the waitlist. Our second theme, “Structural Transphobia”, describes the attitudinal, technological, physical, and architectural barriers faced by the participants. For example, one caregiver described a hospital admission for suicide attempt during which the hospital bracelet displayed the wrong gender, the wrong name, contributing to frequent mis-gendering. Frustration with the inability to change the name and gender marker in provincial charting systems was similarly of concern. Our final theme, “Manitoba: An Information Desert” describes the systemic barriers faced including lack of knowledgeable providers and reliable information within the province. Youth and caregivers described concerns with identifying primary care and councilors that understood challenges specific to transgender youth. Conclusion Although delays in gender-affirming therapy were noted, youth socially transitioned and accessed existing resources. However, mental health concerns persisted and participants felt frustrated and unsupported during their extensive wait times. Improved experiences may be achieved by additional communication from the clinic, hands-on assistance with accessing relevant resources, and an improved online presence. Potential competing interests Funding was obtained by a resident research small grant from the University of Manitoba. A similar abstract was submitted to CPEG but it focuses on a new intervention of a phone call from social work when a youth is added to the waitlist.

PubMed-indexed Research Productivity of Urology Applicants and Residents: Does Medical Student Research Productivity Predict Resident Research or Pursuit of an Academic Career?

ObjectivesTo assess the research output of urology residents at top programs and investigate the correlation between medical school research productivity (MRP), research during residency (RRP), and pursuit of academic practice. Further, to characterize trends in MRP before and after the transition to pass/fail scoring of USMLE Step 1. MethodsOur team previously reported on the PubMed-indexed research productivity of applicants matching into top 50 urology programs. Here, we used the same list of residents, recorded their publications during residency, and noted their career paths, including fellowships, academic roles, or private practice. We then highlight the relationship between MRP, RRP, and pursuit of an academic career. We also highlight trends in MRP of applicants matching to top residency programs before and after the transition to pass/fail Step 1 exams. ResultsWe collected data on 727 residents. On multivariate logistic regression, total medical school publications (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97, 1.19), total urology publications (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92, 1.21), and total first author publications (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91, 1.33) were not associated with academic appointment after residency. On the other hand, RRP was correlated with pursuit of academics (1.08, 95% 1.03,1.14). MRP was significantly higher amongst applicants who applied with a pass/fail exam compared to those who did not. ConclusionMRP is not predictive of pursuing an academic career, but RRP is. There is a significant increase in average MRP of those matching to top urology programs after the transition to a pass/fail scoring system for Step 1.

A Dedicated Research Rotation Increases Orthopaedic Residency Scholarly Activity.

Although clinical research has traditionally been a part of orthopaedic residency, there are now certain core requirements created by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), which outline the type of research activities to be completed during residency. However, there are no specific details included in the ACGME guidelines regarding how these milestones are to be met. Nor is there specificity regarding expectations of scholarly activity to be completed by the time of graduation. There is a paucity of literature demonstrating the effectiveness of implementing a dedicated research block in an orthopaedic surgical residency, especially in the community setting where limited research-related resources are available. We implemented a dedicated research rotation along with a set of research milestones and guidelines at our single orthopaedic surgery community residency program. A search was performed through PubMed using residents' and faculty members' names to find publications included a 7-year period from 2015 to 2022 to determine number of publications by residents and faculty. Scholarly activity of faculty was analyzed and quantified using self-reported annual surveys. The average annual number of resident publications (by all 25 residents) increased from 2 to 26 after implementation of a dedicated research rotation. Faculty's scholarly activity, as measured by the following criteria, increased as well: number of publications (from 22 to 55), conference presentations (from 51 to 83), and other presentations (from 43 to 72). Implementation of a dedicated research rotation in a community orthopaedic residency program is associated with an increased publication rate in major academic journals among residents and faculty. There is also an observed association with implementation of a dedicated resident research rotation and an increase in faculty scholarly activity satisfying ACGME faculty requirements.

"Research happens a lot in other settings-so why not here?" A qualitative interview study of stakeholders' views about advance planning for care home residents' research participation.

Underrepresentation of care home residents in research has resulted in a poorer evidence base for health care in care homes. Fewer opportunities to take part in research, as well as assumptions made by others about their interest or wishes, creates challenges for residents' inclusion in research. Early discussions about research preferences and wishes may be beneficial. This qualitative study aimed to explore stakeholders' views about how care home residents can be supported to communicate their wishes about research participation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 stakeholders: care home residents (n = 5), relatives (n = 5), care home staff (n = 5), other health and social care professionals who work with care homes (n = 6), and care home researchers (n = 4). Interviews were conducted virtually or face-to-face and data were analysed using thematic analysis. Views about resident research participation, the barriers and facilitators to their inclusion, and the role of advance research planning were iteratively organized into three themes: (i) We're of no value to research; (ii) Research is difficult; and (iii) Advance research planning: good in theory, challenging in practice. Subthemes were also identified, and findings were discussed with a Patient and Public Involvement group for additional reflections. Stakeholders identified a number of barriers to including care home residents in research, including knowing their preferences about research. The development of interventions to facilitate communication that can be adapted to individuals' requirements are needed to support discussions and decision-making with care home residents about wishes and preferences for future research participation.

Obgyn resident research program practices and outcomes after implementation in an academically affiliated residency program

ProblemUnlike other aspects of Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) residency training, the research education curriculum and requirements are not standardized. It is unclear what constitutes core curricula in educational research programs, which components are most useful and efficacious, and how to use these findings to adapt existing programs.ApproachA multi-phase approach to (1) garner cross-sectional data from United States OBGYN Residency Program Directors and review previously published literature, (2) use Phase I and input from clinical, research and education faculty to develop a comprehensive program, and (3) evaluate the program for resident research productivity, knowledge and satisfaction.OutcomesPhase I: Sixty-one (31%) Program Directors completed the survey. Most reported ≤ 4 research didactics per year and no dedicated research rotation. Programs with post graduate year (PGY) level specific didactics, a research rotation, or allocated time for the Research Director role noted higher odds of resident research resulting in peer-reviewed publication. Phase II: A Resident Research Program was adapted to include a clinical and research faculty co-directorship and seven additional didactics (all of which were PGY-specific). A departmentally funded resident research grant and a repository to monitor completion of milestones and program requirements have been developed. Surveys were used to track residents’ research competence and satisfaction with the research program. While resident involvement in research activities and satisfaction with opportunities for scholarly activity have improved, resident self-evaluations and mentor evaluations have not. In addition, we have not seen an increase in publications or presentations.ConclusionImplementation of components of a research program associated with increased productivity did not result in increased productivity in our program, however, resident satisfaction with scholarly activity did improve.

Guidance for Resident Research Training

Guidance for Resident Research Training

Service Providers' Perspectives of an Integrated Community Mental Health Service in the UK.

This qualitative service evaluation aims to provide in-depth insights of service providers' perspectives of a new integrated community mental health service piloted in one NHS Integrated Care Board locality in South West England, UK, considering to what extent the service is meeting the mental health support needs of adults who are in between primary and secondary care services. In total, 21 semi-structured remote interviews were carried out in June-August 2023 with service providers and lived experience representatives. The evaluation was carried out through a researcher in residence -placement. Qualitative analysis drew on framework and thematic analysis, which was completed using Nvivo 20. Thematic analysis drew on a framework of context, mechanisms and intended or unintended consequences. These showed that service providers' positive expectations of the service were undermined by insufficient integration, which was evident from the imbalances in information flow and presence of pre-existing provider specific practices. The evaluation found several improvement opportunities: a need for deepening integration beyond the initial service development phase; aligning working practices with service delivery aims and ensuring that new services are not rolled out prematurely before service delivery practices have been fully developed.

The Readiness Imperative: Leveraging Large Animal Resident Research to Enhance Expeditionary Surgical Skills.

The Defense Health Agency aims to ensure that military surgical residents have the expeditionary general surgical skills necessary to deploy to a combat environment and maintains the Clinical Investigation Programs (CIPs) that foster research during graduate medical education. This project evaluates the potential to achieve both aims simultaneously through a large animal Combat Casualty Care Research Program (CCCRP). Large animal experimental protocols within a single CIP's CCCRP were collected from July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2022. Operations performed were tabulated and categorized by Emergency General Surgery procedure equivalent. In addition, procedures performed by a single resident from July 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022, were separately indexed for a more granular analysis. The results are presented with total 5-year numbers listed first, followed by single resident 2-year numbers in parentheses. The residents at the CIP carried out 8676 (1,609) tabulated procedures. Major surgical procedures included 573 (154) laparotomies, 364 (129) thoracotomies, 279 (125) splenectomies, 219 (108) craniotomies, 206 (81) hepatorrhaphies, 363 (62) nephrectomies, 383 (48) bowel resections, 215 (48) spine exposures with laminectomies, and 173 (9) sternotomies. Additional procedures included 1028 (127) central venous lines, 878 (127) arterial lines, 90 (67) tube thoracostomies, 199 (37) carotid artery exposures, 394 (29) suprapubic urostomies, and placement of 278 (10) aortic occlusion catheters. At this time, the residents had 17 (10) presentations at national meetings, 8 (7) research awards, and published 20 peer-reviewed manuscripts. Additionally, the residents involved in the CCCRP gained valuable experience in critical care, including management of 110 traumatic brain injuries, 121 Intercranial Pressure catheters, 316 cases of hemorrhagic shock, and 211 massive transfusion protocols, among a variety of other vital critical care skills. This large animal CCCRP represents a unique training model that not only achieves its primary goal of fostering graduate medical education research but also bolsters Emergency General Surgery readiness for military surgical residents.

Increasing Neurosurgical Resident Research Productivity Through Cultural Shift: Choosing Carrots Over Sticks.

Introduction As part of the Milestones Initiative of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), residents in neurosurgery are expected to participate in either clinical research or basic science research. Therefore, each neurosurgical training program must offer the support and opportunity to achieve this goal. In 2012, a structured effort to promote a resident culture of research was introduced into the authors' neurosurgery residency training curriculum. This study reviews this experience over the last decade. Methods Data were collected from the authors' departmental neurosurgery website and Scopus to create a database of neurosurgical residents who graduated 10 years before and after 2012 and their publication output. Bibliometric measures were collected for all articles published by residents. Results were compared between residents who graduated before and after the introduction of the research initiative. Results A total of 127 publications were analyzed from 37 residents, constituting 174 authorships. There was a statistically significant increase in the number of publications per resident (P < 0.001), citation number per author (P = 0.002), and author h-index (P < 0.001) after implementing the initiative. There were no significant differences in the pre-residency and baseline demographic variables between the two groups. Conclusion This study relates the experience of initiating a research culture at the authors' neurosurgery training program, which did not emphasize scholarly productivity historically. The effort focused on creating a culture of curiosity as opposed to formal requirements. The results provided evidence that this strategy yielded a significant increase in academic output and impact. These findings have important implications for neurosurgical training programs.

Nationwide Survey to Characterize and Compare the Research Experiences of American Society of Health-System Pharmacists-Accredited Postgraduate Year One Pharmacy Residency Programs.

Background: Many Postgraduate Year One (PGY1) Pharmacy residencies provide research training however, details of this training are not well described. Publication rates have been utilized to assess residency research learning experiences. Higher publication rates have been reported by programs that have implemented a structured research learning experience. Objective: The primary objective was to identify differences in the research learning experiences for American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) accredited PGY1 Pharmacy residencies with reported resident publication rates of ≥20% vs <20%. Methods: This survey was distributed to PGY1 Pharmacy residency program directors (RPDs). Seven sections were analyzed to identify research learning experience differences between programs with reported publication rates of ≥20% vs <20%: (1) program characteristics/research outcomes; (2) involved individuals; (3) requirements; (4) learning experience structure; (5) educational methods; (6) formal education; (7) barriers/RPD perceptions. Variables with P < 0.05 on logistic regression were considered statistically significant. Results: The survey response rate was 31.3% (308/984). Significant positive predictors for reported publication rates of ≥20% were: involved individuals: research director/coordinator, individuals trained in statistics, non-pharmacy medical staff; requirements: Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative training, research seminars/training courses, research manuscript; learning experience structure: research committee; educational methods: didactic residency-led lectures/courses, formal workshops, self-taught online modules; and formal education: manuscript preparation. Conclusion: This study suggests there are differences in the research learning experiences at PGY1 Pharmacy residencies with reported resident publications rates of ≥20% vs <20%. We encourage PGY1 Pharmacy residency programs to consider implementing elements associated with reported resident publication rates of ≥20%.

Impact: Effects of a Formal Resident Research Curriculum and Dedicated Research Team.

Impact: Effects of a Formal Resident Research Curriculum and Dedicated Research Team.

Success of Resident Research Grants in Orthopaedic Trauma From 2000 to 2022: A Retrospective Review.

The objective of this study was to determine the publication rate for orthopaedic trauma resident research projects that receive grant funding and the long-term academic involvement of the grant recipients. Retrospective. Publically available records for resident research grant recipients. Resident research grants on orthopaedic trauma topics from Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA), AO North America (AONA), and Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation from 2000 to 2022. Subsequent related publications, grant size, time to publication, sustained academic involvement of the residents as measured by academic position, total number of publications, and h-index. Three hundred ninety-seven orthopaedic trauma grants (OTA 117, AONA 225, and OREF 55) were identified. A total of 38% (151) of grants resulted in a publication with no significant difference between agencies (P = 0.94). The average amount awarded was $9,843, with no correlation to publication (P = 0.63). The mean time to publication was 3.57 ± 2.33 years. The time to publication for AONA was significantly longer than for OTA (4.14 vs. 2.83 years, P = 0.004). There was no difference in total publications, h-index, or NIH grants between grant recipients from different agencies. More OTA grant recipients held an academic position compared with AONA grant recipients (63% vs. 43%, P = 0.003). Grant awardees with initial publication success were 1.7 times as likely to have a future academic appointment (P = 0.014) and had 1.9 times the number of publications than those without (P = 0.001). Awardees with an h-index in the top quartile were significantly more likely to have published than those with an h-index in the bottom quartile (P = 0.007). Fewer than half of orthopaedic trauma-related resident research grants resulted in a publication with comparable rates across agencies. Grant size did not predict publication success. Publication success was a positive predictor of continued academic involvement. Most publications occurred within 5 years, suggesting that these grants may be most helpful in career development if awarded during the first 1-2 years of a 5-year orthopaedic residency program.

Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Program Websites: Assessing Information Gaps and Opportunities for Attracting Applicants.

The quality and volume of information on orthopaedic surgery residency program websites are helpful for informed decision making of prospective applicants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the content on orthopaedic surgery residency program websites and identify areas for improvement. In November 2023, 203 orthopaedic surgery residency programs were reviewed using the Association of American Medical Colleges Residency Explorer tool. Fourteen nonfunctional websites were excluded, leaving n = 189. Websites were assessed for 11 variables: resources for assisting resident research (eg, biomechanics laboratory, research assistant, and advisors), residents' past institutional affiliations, current resident profiles (including hometown and interests), alumni data, fellowship matches, American Board of Orthopedic Surgery I/II pass rates, Alpha Omega Alpha Society affiliation, target United States Medical Licensing Examination/ Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Learning Exam Step 2 scores, educational activities (journal club, grand rounds, didactics), evaluation methods, and mentorship. Website variables differed markedly among identified program types, which included community programs, university programs (UPs), and affiliated programs (APs). Disparities were noted in the disclosure of residents' previous institutions ( P = 0.001), the availability of alumni names ( P = 0.001), research resources ( P = 0.001), academic activities ( P = 0.007), assigned mentorship programs ( P = 0.006), and fellowship match information ( P = 0.027). Notably, community programs shared statistically significantly less information in these areas compared with UPs and APs ( P = 0.001). While there was a proportionate sharing of information between UPs and APs, UPs exhibited a slightly higher overall percentage of websites sharing more detailed information. The quality and comprehensiveness of information on orthopaedic surgery residency program websites vary markedly. Most of the orthopaedic surgery residency programs provided information on residents' past institutions and academic activities. However, very few provided information on designated mentorship programs or objective measures such as target Step 2 examination scores and ABOS pass rates. Improving the quality of information available on program websites will enhance transparency and consistency, enabling prospective applicants to make more informed decisions about where to apply and interview.

Unlocking Peer Review: Elevating Scholarly Writing and Research Competence in Urology Residency.

It is incumbent upon training programs to set the foundation for evidence-based practices and to create opportunities for trainees to develop into academic leaders. As dedicated resident research time and funding have declined in recent years, residency programs and the field at large will need to create new ways to incorporate scholarly activity into residency curricula. Literature across specialties demonstrates barriers to resident involvement including lack of time, cost, and absent scholarly mentorship. Peer review stands as a ready-made solution that can be formalized into a collaborative relationship with journals. A formal relationship between professional societies, academic journals, and residencies can facilitate the use of peer review as a teaching tool for residency programs.

Accelerating resident research within quantitative collaboration units in academic healthcare

With increased access to biomedical and electronic health records data and the complexity of research questions, individuals in residency programmes who aim to conduct research require specialized educational programmes and biostatistics support. Biostatistics collaboration units in academic health centres often work with residents to conduct data‐intensive research. These units face numerous challenges related to providing training in statistical literacy and collaborating on resident‐led research within very restricted timelines. Since 2019, the Duke Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design (BERD) Methods Core has supported over 247 resident‐led projects by developing tools and resources to address these challenges. This manuscript presents novel processes and training materials that other institutions can use to help biostatistics collaboration units effectively support resident training programmes. We provide a framework to support the development of collaborative teams, along with specialized training materials for residents who collaborate with these teams.

Analysis of neurosurgery resident research activity in the United States.

Evaluation of the demographic and academic characteristics of current neurosurgery residents may provide prospective students with insight into factors that affect research output. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the research output among neurosurgery residents. US neurosurgery residency programs were abstracted from the American Association of Neurological Surgeons website. Demographic data on 1690 current residents across 119 programs were collected using publicly available institutional websites, Doximity, and LinkedIn. The h-index of each resident was recorded using Scopus and exported into the NIH iCite tool to determine the weighted relative citation ratio (w-RCR) and mean relative citation ratio (m-RCR). The total number of publications, h-index, and w-RCR were used as a proxy for research output, while m-RCR was used to measure research impact. One-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis H-tests were used to assess the statistical significance of relationships between demographic data and measures of research activity. A total of 1690 residents (25.4% female), representing 119 programs, were evaluated. Neurosurgery residents had an average of 17 publications, h-index of 5.5, m-RCR of 1.4, and w-RCR of 16.9, with an upward trend of research activity by postgraduate year (PGY) class. Male residents on average had a greater total number of publications (p < 0.001), higher h-index (p < 0.001), and higher w-RCR (p = 0.002) compared with their female peers. Significant differences in research activity were also observed by degree (Doctor of Medicine [MD], Doctor of Osteopathy [DO], or other), where those with MD and other degrees had higher metrics than those with DO degrees. International medical graduates (IMGs) also had higher research output than American medical graduates (AMGs) (p < 0.001). Differences in all measures of research activity except impact were also observed in research activity when pre-residency medical school ranks were compared. The authors observed overall high research activity among neurosurgery residents. Factors such as gender, degree, PGY, IMG/AMG status, and medical school rank may therefore be related to the success of matching within neurological surgery. Although large disparities in gender representation have been identified in neurosurgery, newer classes are trending toward shrinking the gap. These data may be used by prospective residents to gauge changes and progress occurring in the neurosurgery match.

Improving the way we do action research in quality improvement

After three decades of action research (AR) there are still questions about its application and contribution in comparison to traditional research methods. The aim of this paper is to explore and critique how two action research frameworks can be employed when improving healthcare processes. We also investigate the role of the Researcher in Residence when using AR in health operations management. Using Problem Resolving Action Research and Collaborative Action Research models we identify the benefits and challenges of conducting AR. To improve the reporting of action research we offer revised guidelines developed within the context of healthcare improvement that will assist both academics and practitioners when undertaking AR. The study also clarifies the important role of the researcher in residence which will assist academics and practitioners by providing consistency to terminology and understanding when undertaking AR research.

How can healthcare organisations increase doctors’ research engagement? A scoping review

PurposeClinician engagement in research has positive impacts for healthcare, but is often difficult for healthcare organisations to support in light of limited resources. This scoping review aimed to describe the literature on health service-administered strategies for increasing research engagement by medical practitioners.Design/methodology/approachMedline, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched from 2000 to 2021 and two independent reviewers screened each record for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were that studies sampled medically qualified clinicians; reported empirical data; investigated effectiveness of an intervention in improving research engagement and addressed interventions implemented by an individual health service/hospital.FindingsOf the 11,084 unique records, 257 studies were included. Most (78.2%) studies were conducted in the USA, and were targeted at residents (63.0%). Outcomes were measured in a variety of ways, most commonly publication-related outcomes (77.4%), though many studies used more than one outcome measure (70.4%). Pre-post (38.8%) and post-only (28.7%) study designs were the most common, while those using a contemporaneous control group were uncommon (11.5%). The most commonly reported interventions included Resident Research Programs (RRPs), protected time, mentorship and education programs. Many articles did not report key information needed for data extraction (e.g. sample size).Originality/valueThis scoping review demonstrated that, despite a large volume of research, issues like poor reporting, infrequent use of robust study designs and heterogeneous outcome measures limited application. The most compelling available evidence pointed to RRPs, protected time and mentorship as effective interventions. Further high-quality evidence is needed to guide healthcare organisations on increasing medical research engagement.

Addressing Low Scholarly Output in Residency With a Resident-Led Society for Innovation and Research.

Research activity in residency develops skills essential for the practice of medicine and has many benefits for residents, residency programs, the community of medicine, and patients. However, resident participation in research and innovation remains limited, with several barriers that are difficult to address without significant overhead or changes to curriculum. In September 2021, the Society for Innovation and Research (SIR), a resident-led organization dedicated to promoting and supporting resident achievement in research and innovation, was founded. Using only 1 hour of protected didactic time a month, SIR workshops provide critical mentoring and feedback to make resident research a success as well as education on various topics of interest to residents. In addition, SIR celebrates and publicizes resident research success and lays the groundwork for interested residents to participate in innovation. The authors analyze the success of SIR in increasing resident research productivity by analyzing PubMed-indexed publications for 11 semesters from fall 2018 to fall 2023. After the launch of SIR, the mean (SD) total number of publications increased from 5.3 (2.4) to 13.3 (1.6) (P = .01), the total mean (SD) number of residents publishing increased from 3.7 (1.3) to 10.0 (1.2) (P = .009), and the mean (SD) total number of coauthored articles increased from 0.1 (0.3) to 2.8 (1.3) (P = .007). The skill set acquired from participation in research during residency is more critical than ever in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. SIR initiatives are generalizable to most residency programs in most specialties and require little overhead in terms of physical space, digital resources, and staffing. The authors are currently exploring expanding the SIR program to other residencies at U.S. institutions and have set up processes for the mantle of SIR leadership to be passed down among the pathology resident body.