PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Scott M Wright

Publications and source records attributed to Scott M Wright.

13 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Minimal prevalence of authorship misrepresentation among internal medicine residency applicants: do previous estimates of "misrepresentation" represent insufficient case finding?.

BACKGROUND: High rates of authorship misrepresentation have been documented among medical trainees. OBJECTIVE: To assess misrepresentation among internal medicine residency applicants while comparing searches used by previous authors (searches 1 and 2) to a more comprehensive strategy (search 3). DESIGN: Review of 497 residency applications. SETTING: Two university-based internal medicine residency programs. MEASUREMENTS: Search 1 was limited to MEDLINE. Search 2 added Current Contents, Science Citation Index, and BIOSIS and included searching journals by hand. Search 3 added seven other databases and contacts to librarians, editors, and coauthors. RESULTS: 224 applicants reported 634 articles; 630 (99%) were verified. The number of applicants with misrepresented citations varied depending on the search used (56 applicants [25%] in search 1 vs. 34 applicants [15%] in search 2 vs. 4 applicants [1.8%] in search 3). CONCLUSIONS: Using a comprehensive search, we found substantially less misrepresentation than had been reported. Previous studies probably overestimated the magnitude of the problem.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Promotion criteria for clinician-educators.

OBJECTIVE: Department of medicine chairs have a critical role in the promotion of clinician-educators. Our primary objective was to determine how chairs viewed: 1) the importance of specific areas of clinician-educator performance in promotion decisions; and 2) the importance and quality of information on available measures of performance. A secondary objective was to compare the views of department chairs with those of promotion and tenure committee chairs. METHODS: In October 1997, a questionnaire was mailed to all department chairs in the United States and Canada asking them to rate the importance of 11 areas of clinician-educators' performance in evaluating them for promotion. We also asked them to rate 36 measures of performance. We compared their responses to a similar 1996 survey administered to promotion committee chairs. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen of 139 department chairs (82%) responded to the survey. When considering a clinician-educator for promotion, department chairs view teaching skills and clinical skills as the most important areas of performance, as did the promotion committee chairs. Of the measures used to evaluate teaching performance, teaching awards were considered most important and rated as a high-quality measure. When evaluating a clinician-educator's clinical skills, peer and trainee evaluation were considered as the most important measures of performance, but these were rated low in quality. Patient satisfaction and objective outcome measures also were viewed as important measures that needed improvement. Promotion committee chairs placed more emphasis on productivity in publications and external grant support when compared to department chairs. CONCLUSION: It is reassuring that both department chairs and promotion committee chairs value teaching skills and clinical skills as the most important areas of a clinician-educator's performance when evaluating for promotion. However, differences in opinion regarding the importance of several performance measures and the need for improved quality measures may represent barriers to the timely promotion of clinician-educators.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

What do academic primary care physicians want in an electronic journal?

To determine the interest of academic general internists and family physicians in specific features of electronic journal publications, we surveyed 350 physicians, 175 randomly selected from each of 2 medical societies: the Society of General Internal Medicine, and the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine. The response rate was 70%. Most general internists and family physicians used online journals sometimes or often. Most general internists and family physicians reported moderate to high interest in having links from original articles, reviews, or editorials to listed references (77% to 89% of internists and 65% to 81% of family physicians) and electronic medical reference texts (73% to 78% of internists and 65% to 83% of family physicians). Less than 25% of both groups reported moderate to high interest in having links to initiate dialog with other readers or to communicate comments to the author or editor. General internists were more likely than were family physicians to have moderate to high interest in having links to appendices and supportive material (e.g., 66% of general internists versus 46% of family physicians for original articles; P < .05) and less likely to have moderate to high interest in links to health-related web sites (44% of general internists versus 69% of family physicians for original articles; P < .05). We conclude that academic general internists and family physicians have strong but not identical interests in specific features of electronic publication that primary care-oriented journals should consider.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

Looking forward to promotion: characteristics of participants in the Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia.

OBJECTIVES: To determine what clinician-educators consider important for promotion, and what support they find helpful and useful for success. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Eighty academic medical centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred eighty-three participants of the Prospective Study of Promotion in Academia comprising assistant professors in departments of medicine from 80 different medical schools in 35 states. MEASUREMENTS: Differences between clinician-educators' and clinician-investigators' work activities, promotion preparedness, and faculty support needs. RESULTS: One hundred seven (58%) of the faculty were clinician-educators (CEs), and 63 (34%) were clinician-investigators (CIs); the remaining 13 fit neither category. Participants had been in their faculty position for 4.7 years. Ninety-eight percent of CIs reported a publication expectation for promotion, and 75% of CEs also reported such an expectation. More CIs had career mentors available than CEs (68% vs 32%, P <.001). Seventy-nine percent of CIs indicated >10% protected scholarly work time, compared to only 35% of CEs (P <.001). Fifty-three percent of CIs as compared to 32% of CEs (P <.01) meet more often than yearly with their chief/chair for performance review, and more CIs have seen written promotion guidelines (72% vs 51%, P <.01). Clinician educators believed out of 11 job performance areas, research, written scholarship, and reputation were the 3 most important factors that would determine the success of their application for promotion. Both CEs and CIs sense that CIs are more likely get promoted (82% vs 79%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinician educators are less familiar with promotion guidelines, meet less often with superiors for performance review, and have less protected time than CI colleagues. There is dissonance between CEs' beliefs and previously published data from promotion committee chairs in the importance given to specific aspects of job performance.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

A systematic review of resident research curricula.

PURPOSE: To review in a systematic manner the published curricula for training house officers in research. METHOD: Articles were identified by searching the Medline, Educational Resources Information Center, and Science Citation Index databases, educational Web sites, and bibliographies of captured articles, and by contacting experts who had developed resident research curricula. Demographic information, curriculum development steps, educational strategies, evaluation methods, and outcomes were abstracted. RESULTS: The search identified 41 articles describing curricula. The most common curricular objectives were to increase house officers' research productivity and improve their critical appraisal skills. Only one curriculum was designed with the goal of producing academic physicians. Among many instructional methods, conducting research projects, exposing learners to role models or mentors, and providing house officers with multiple opportunities to present their work were common. Only 27 articles (66%) articulated goals or objectives, and 11 included (27%) needs assessments. Evaluation methods were often rudimentary, frequently limited to learners' self-assessments or authors' anecdotal reports. Five (12%) reported pre-post-intervention testing of learners' knowledge. No curricula were evaluated as prospective pretest-posttest controlled trials. A minority of articles reported costs, obstacles encountered, or modifications made in the curriculum. CONCLUSION: Successful educational interventions should incorporate needs assessments, clearly defined learning objectives, and evaluation methods. While many curricula for resident research exist, the lack of detailed developmental information and meaningful evaluations hinders educators interested in adopting these curricula.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2003

Serving as a physician role model for a diverse population of medical learners.

PURPOSE: Medical learners look to role models to better understand the values, attitudes, behaviors, and ethics of the medical profession. This study examined issues related to physicians serving as role models for diverse medical learners. METHOD: Between September and November 2000, in-depth semi-structured 30-minute interviews were conducted with 29 highly regarded role models, as judged by medical house officers at two large teaching hospitals in Baltimore, Maryland. Interview transcripts were independently coded and compared for agreement. Content analysis identified several major categories of themes that were examined and conceptually organized. RESULTS: The informants identified issues that relate to role modeling for diverse medical learners. Subcategories under the domain of similarity facilitates role modeling included learners prefer role models similar to them, role modeling is easier when the learner resembles the teacher, and minority physicians may be better role models for minority learners. Under the domain role modeling when physician-teachers and learners are different were the subcategories extra effort may be necessary, success promotes and inspires confidence, and role modeling across diversity is an achievable objective that should be pursued. The final domain, approaches to differences between physician-teachers and learners, encompassed embrace diversity, act as a consultant and refer when necessary, and minimize and disregard all differences. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study should draw attention to these issues and may serve as a stimulus for teaching physicians to consider a broader range of options for successful interactions with medical learners who are different from them.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Family physicians' interests in special features of electronic publication.

OBJECTIVE: Because many of the medical journals read by family physicians now have an electronic version, the authors conducted a survey to determine the interest of family physicians in specific features of electronic journal publications. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We surveyed 175 family physicians randomly selected from the American Academy of Family Physicians. RESULTS: The response rate was 63%. About half of family physicians reported good to excellent computer proficiency, and about one quarter used online journals sometimes or often. Many respondents reported high interest in having links to: an electronic medical text (48% for original articles, 56% for review articles), articles' list of references (52% for original articles, 56% for review articles), and health-related Websites (48% for original and review articles). CONCLUSION: Primary care-oriented journals should consider the interests of family physicians when developing and offering electronic features for their readers.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed2002

Prominent medical journals often provide insufficient information to assess the validity of studies with negative results.

BACKGROUND: Physicians reading the medical literature attempt to determine whether research studies are valid. However, articles with negative results may not provide sufficient information to allow physicians to properly assess validity. METHODS: We analyzed all original research articles with negative results published in 1997 in the weekly journals BMJ, JAMA, Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine as well as those published in the 1997 and 1998 issues of the bimonthly Annals of Internal Medicine (N = 234). Our primary objective was to quantify the proportion of studies with negative results that comment on power and present confidence intervals. Secondary outcomes were to quantify the proportion of these studies with a specified effect size and a defined primary outcome. Stratified analyses by study design were also performed. RESULTS: Only 30% of the articles with negative results comment on power. The reporting of power (range: 15%-52%) and confidence intervals (range: 55-81%) varied significantly among journals. Observational studies of etiology/risk factors addressed power less frequently (15%, 95% CI, 8-21%) than did clinical trials (56%, 95% CI, 46-67%, p < 0.001). While 87% of articles with power calculations specified an effect size the authors sought to detect, a minority gave a rationale for the effect size. Only half of the studies with negative results clearly defined a primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Prominent medical journals often provide insufficient information to assess the validity of studies with negative results.

Confidence Intervals↗
PubMed2002

Excellence in role modelling: insight and perspectives from the pros.

BACKGROUND: Role modelling is an effective teaching method in medical education. We sought to better understand role modelling by examining the insights of respected physician role models. METHODS: We conducted 30-minute in-depth interviews with 29 highly regarded role models at 2 large teaching hospitals. We coded the transcripts independently, and compared our coding for agreement. Content analysis identified several major categories of themes. RESULTS: The informants identified specific characteristics related to role modelling. Subcategories under the domain of personal qualities included interpersonal skills, a positive outlook, a commitment to excellence and growth, integrity and leadership. Under the domain of teaching, the subcategories were establishing rapport with learners, developing specific teaching philosophies and methods, and being committed to the growth of learners. Subjects thought there was some overlap between teaching and role modelling, but felt that the latter was more implicit and more encompassing. Being a strong clinician was regarded as necessary but not sufficient for being an exemplary physician role model. Perceived barriers to effective role modelling included being impatient and overly opinionated, being quiet, being overextended, and having difficulty remembering names and faces. Physician role models described role modeling consciousness, in that they specifically think about being role models when interacting with learners. Subjects believed that medical learners should emulate multiple role models. INTERPRETATION: Highly regarded physician role models possess personal qualities, teaching abilities and exceptional clinical skills that outweigh their own barriers to serving as effective role models. Many of these positive attributes of role models represent behaviours that can be modified or skills that can be acquired.

Adult↗