Q.K.W. Li is a clinical research coordinator, Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7318-1701 .
K. Wollny is instructor, Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, and at the time of writing was a PhD candidate, Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, and trainee, Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Acad Med. 2022 Sep 1;97(9):1403-1412. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004764. Epub 2022 Jun 1.
To describe the literature on clinician-scientist training programs to inform the development of contemporary and inclusive training models.
The authors conducted a scoping review, searching the PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases from database inception until May 25, 2020. Studies presenting primary research that described and evaluated clinician-scientist training programs were identified for data abstraction. On the basis of deductive and inductive methods, information about program characteristics, curricula, teaching strategies, and success metrics was extracted. The extracted variables were analyzed using descriptive statistics.
From the initial 7,544 citations retrieved and 4,974 unique abstracts screened, 81 studies were included. Of the 81 included studies, 65 (80.2%) were published between 2011 and 2020, 54 (66.7%) were conducted in the United States, and 64 (79.0%) described programs that provided broad clinician-scientist training. Few programs provided funding or protected research time or specifically addressed needs of trainees from underrepresented minority groups. Curricula emphasized research methods and knowledge dissemination, whereas patient-oriented research competencies were not described. Most programs incorporated aspects of mentorship and used multiple teaching strategies, such as direct and interactive instruction. Extrinsic metrics of success (e.g., research output) were dominant in reported program outcomes compared with markers of intrinsic success (e.g., career fulfillment).
Although programs are providing clinician-scientists with practical skills training, opportunities exist for curricular and pedagogic optimization that may better support this complex career path. Training programs for clinician-scientists can address contemporary issues of wellness and equity by reconsidering metrics of program success and evolving the core tenets of their education models to include equity, diversity, and inclusion principles and patient-oriented research competencies.
描述临床科学家培训计划的文献，为当代和包容性培训模式的发展提供信息。
作者进行了范围综述，从数据库创建开始到 2020 年 5 月 25 日，在 PubMed/MEDLINE、CINAHL 和 Embase 数据库中进行了搜索。确定了描述和评估临床科学家培训计划的主要研究报告，以进行数据提取。根据演绎和归纳方法，提取了有关计划特征、课程、教学策略和成功指标的信息。使用描述性统计对提取的变量进行了分析。
从最初检索到的 7544 条引文和 4974 篇独特的摘要中，有 81 项研究被纳入。在这 81 项纳入的研究中，65 项（80.2%）发表于 2011 年至 2020 年，54 项（66.7%）在美国进行，64 项（79.0%）描述了提供广泛临床科学家培训的计划。很少有计划提供资金或保护研究时间，或者专门解决代表性不足的少数群体受训者的需求。课程强调研究方法和知识传播，而没有描述面向患者的研究能力。大多数计划都纳入了指导的方面，并使用了多种教学策略，如直接和互动教学。与内在成功的指标（如职业满足感）相比，报告的计划成果中以成功的外在指标（如研究产出）为主。
尽管这些计划为临床科学家提供了实践技能培训，但在课程和教学优化方面仍有机会，可以更好地支持这条复杂的职业道路。临床科学家培训计划可以通过重新考虑计划成功的指标以及通过改变教育模式的核心原则来纳入公平、多样性和包容性原则以及面向患者的研究能力，来解决当代的健康和公平问题。
