Resident Scholarly Activity and Productivity Outcomes Before and After Implementing a Structured Research Program: A Before-After Study

Sydney Krispin; Eric Kontowicz; Brett Faine; Michael Takacs; Karisa K Harland; J Priyanka Vakkalanka; Kelli Wallace; Andrew Nugent; Nicholas M Mohr

doi:10.1002/aet2.70082

Emergency medicine (EM) residency programs require participation in scholarly activity. In 2017, we launched a formal Resident Research Program (RRP) for physician residents in our 3-year accredited residency program. We aimed to measure the association between the implementation of the RRP and resident scholarly productivity.ObjectivesEmergency medicine (EM) residency programs require participation in scholarly activity. In 2017, we launched a formal Resident Research Program (RRP) for physician residents in our 3-year accredited residency program. We aimed to measure the association between the implementation of the RRP and resident scholarly productivity.This analysis was a before-after study of residents in a Midwestern university-based EM residency program (7-10 per class) graduating between 2013 and 2023. The RRP was implemented in July 2017 and offered resources and requirements; our study compared outcomes before and after the launch of the program. We provided a dedicated training program study coordinator, 24-h in-house research assistants, faculty/research staff mentorship, and research funding. Residents were required to complete a hypothesis-driven research project and submit an abstract to a professional meeting or manuscript for publication. We tracked scholarly productivity per class, including publications, presentations, first-author manuscripts, and faculty publications with a resident. We measured the association between the RRP and scholarly productivity through univariate Poisson regression models to report the unadjusted rate ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).MethodsThis analysis was a before-after study of residents in a Midwestern university-based EM residency program (7-10 per class) graduating between 2013 and 2023. The RRP was implemented in July 2017 and offered resources and requirements; our study compared outcomes before and after the launch of the program. We provided a dedicated training program study coordinator, 24-h in-house research assistants, faculty/research staff mentorship, and research funding. Residents were required to complete a hypothesis-driven research project and submit an abstract to a professional meeting or manuscript for publication. We tracked scholarly productivity per class, including publications, presentations, first-author manuscripts, and faculty publications with a resident. We measured the association between the RRP and scholarly productivity through univariate Poisson regression models to report the unadjusted rate ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).Ninety residents were included (n = 43 after RRP launch). Annual mean resident scholarly productivity increased post-intervention for publications (10.4 vs. 6.2 publications per class, RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.09-2.59), presentations (7.4 vs. 3.7 abstracts per class, RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.19-3.42), and first-author publications (5.8 vs. 2.2 publications per class, RR 2.66, 95% CI 1.40-5.09). No significant change in faculty co-authors was observed (12.8 vs. 9.5, RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.95-1.92).ResultsNinety residents were included (n = 43 after RRP launch). Annual mean resident scholarly productivity increased post-intervention for publications (10.4 vs. 6.2 publications per class, RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.09-2.59), presentations (7.4 vs. 3.7 abstracts per class, RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.19-3.42), and first-author publications (5.8 vs. 2.2 publications per class, RR 2.66, 95% CI 1.40-5.09). No significant change in faculty co-authors was observed (12.8 vs. 9.5, RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.95-1.92).The implementation of a structured RRP was associated with increased resident scholarly productivity. The targeted research resources served as both a strategy to support resident research and enhance departmental academic engagement. Future research should examine the perceptions, quality, and impact of scholarly activity requirements on residents.ConclusionsThe implementation of a structured RRP was associated with increased resident scholarly productivity. The targeted research resources served as both a strategy to support resident research and enhance departmental academic engagement. Future research should examine the perceptions, quality, and impact of scholarly activity requirements on residents.

Resident Scholarly Activity and Productivity Outcomes Before and After Implementing a Structured Research Program: A Before-After Study

Files and links (1)

Abstract

Details

Metrics