Dr. Yeh is associate professor of medicine and epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. Ms. Bertram is senior research program coordinator, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. Dr. Brancati (deceased) was distinguished service professor of medicine and epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. Dr. Cofrancesco is associate professor of medicine and Johns Hopkins Institute for Excellence in Education Professor of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Acad Med. 2015 Feb;90(2):203-8. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000554.
To determine perceptions of general internal medicine (GIM) division directors of the importance of and support for clinician-educators' (CEs') scholarship.
In 2010, the authors identified 127 accredited U.S. MD-granting medical schools with a GIM division, identified 144 GIM directors, and were able to survey 129 of them. Directors were asked to rate the importance of specific CE scholarly accomplishments for promotion from assistant to associate professor, to describe current research support for CEs, and to state how they would support the scholarly work of CEs if they had funding.
Fifty-five directors (42.6%) from 52 institutions responded; there were no significant differences between responding and nonresponding schools. Curriculum development, presentations at national meetings and other institutions, review articles, and book chapters were rated as "most/very important" or "important/somewhat important" by over 90%. Approximately half rated published original peer-reviewed articles as "most/very important"; slightly less than half rated these "not important," a difference associated with having a specific CE track. If $100,000 per year were available to enhance the scholarly productivity of CEs, directors suggested spending it on faculty development, project coordination, protected time for CEs, and methodological and statistical support.
This nationwide survey of GIM division directors confirms that academic CEs in GIM are judged on a wide variety of scholarly activities, many of which are consistent across institutions. However, academic GIM CEs need to understand their institutions' specific criteria, especially regarding the value placed on original, peer-reviewed publications.
确定综合内科（GIM）分部主任对临床教育者（CEs）学术研究的重要性和支持的看法。
2010 年，作者确定了 127 家获得美国医学博士学位的医学院，其中有 GIM 分部，确定了 144 名 GIM 主任，并对其中 129 名主任进行了调查。主任们被要求对特定 CE 学术成就的重要性进行评分，以晋升为助理教授，描述当前对 CEs 的研究支持，并说明如果有资金，他们将如何支持 CEs 的学术工作。
52 所学校的 55 名主任（42.6%）做出了回应；回应学校与非回应学校之间没有显著差异。课程开发、在全国会议和其他机构的演讲、评论文章和书籍章节被评为“最重要/非常重要”或“重要/有些重要”的比例超过 90%。约有一半的人将发表的原始同行评议文章评为“最重要/非常重要”；略低于一半的人认为这些“不重要”，这种差异与特定的 CE 轨道有关。如果每年有 10 万美元用于提高 CEs 的学术生产力，主任们建议将其用于教师发展、项目协调、CEs 的受保护时间以及方法学和统计支持。
这项针对 GIM 分部主任的全国性调查证实，GIM 中的学术 CEs 是根据广泛的学术活动进行评估的，其中许多活动在各机构之间是一致的。然而，学术 GIM CEs 需要了解他们机构的具体标准，特别是关于对原始同行评议出版物的重视。
