Brandon Catherine, Jamadar David, Girish Gandikota, Dong Qian, Morag Yoav, Mullan Patricia
Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, TC 2910, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, TC 2910, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
Acad Radiol. 2015 Apr;22(4):534-8. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.12.006. Epub 2015 Jan 27.
Publishing is critical for academic medicine career advancement. Rejection of manuscripts can be demoralizing. Obstacles faced by clinical faculty may include lack of time, confidence, and optimal writing practices. This study describes the development and evaluation of a peer-writing group, informed by theory and research on faculty development and writing.
Five clinical-track radiology faculty members formed a "Writers' Circle" to promote scholarly productivity and reflection on writing practices. Members decided to work with previously rejected manuscripts. After members' initial meeting, interactions were informal, face to face during clinical work, and online. After the first 6 months, an anonymous survey asked members about the status of articles and evaluations of the writing group.
Ten previously rejected articles, at least one from each member, were submitted to the Circle. In 6 months, four manuscripts were accepted for publication, five were in active revision, and one was withdrawn. All participants (100%) characterized the program as worth their time, increasing their motivation to write, their opportunities to support scholarly productivity of colleagues, and their confidence in generating scholarship.
Peer-support writing groups can facilitate the pooling of expertise and the exchange of recommended writing practices. Our peer-support group increased scholarly productivity and provided a collegial approach to academic writing.
发表文章对于学术医学职业发展至关重要。稿件被拒可能会令人士气低落。临床教员面临的障碍可能包括时间不足、信心缺乏以及最佳写作方法的欠缺。本研究描述了一个同行写作小组的发展与评估情况,该小组的形成基于教员发展与写作方面的理论及研究。
五名临床放射学教员组成了一个“写作圈”,以提高学术产出并促进对写作方法的思考。成员们决定处理之前被拒的稿件。在成员首次会议之后,互动是非正式的,在临床工作期间面对面交流以及在线交流。在最初的6个月之后,进行了一项匿名调查,询问成员们文章的状态以及对写作小组的评价。
十篇之前被拒的文章提交给了写作圈,每位成员至少提交一篇。在6个月内,四篇稿件被接受发表,五篇正在积极修改,一篇被撤回。所有参与者(100%)都认为该项目值得投入时间,提高了他们的写作动力、支持同事学术产出的机会以及进行学术创作的信心。
同行支持的写作小组可以促进专业知识的汇集以及推荐写作方法的交流。我们的同行支持小组提高了学术产出,并为学术写作提供了一种合作方式。