Pediatric Subspecialty Fellowship Clinical Training Project: Recent Graduates and Midcareer Survey Comparison
Pediatric Subspecialty Fellowship Clinical Training Project: Recent Graduates and Midcareer Survey Comparison
复制标题
DOI：
10.1542/peds.2013-3861e
复制
发表时间：
2014-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
8
通讯作者：
Stevenson, David K.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Freed, Gary L.;Dunham, Kelly M.;Stevenson, David K.
背景：美国儿科委员会责成一个工作组来审查进修培训。作为该过程的一部分，我们进行了一项研究，以评估最近完成培训的人员和处于职业生涯中期的人员对进修培训的看法。 方法：美国儿科委员会提供了跨所有 14 个亚专业的亚专科医生的随机样本（N = 5072）。专科医生被确定为应届毕业生 (N = 2702)、在过去 5 年内完成专科培训的人员或职业中期专科医生 (N = 2370) 以及 15 至 20 年前完成专科培训的人员。 2012 年 1 月至 3 月期间，通过邮寄方式发放了两份不同的 20 项结构化调查问卷，每组 1 份。使用 X-2 统计数据评估组间差异。结果：应届毕业生的回复率为 77.8%，职业生涯中期亚专科医生的回复率为 73.8%。总体而言，大多数专科医生将他们的工作主要描述为临床医生（36%）或临床医生教育者（48%）。较少（12%）报告主要研究。大多数专科医生 (55%) 都有全职学术任命，但应届毕业生比职业生涯中期专科医生更有可能这样做 (62% vs 48%；P < .0001)。大多数人 (60%) 认为其子专业的培训总长度应保持在 3 年。然而，几乎三分之一 (29%) 的人认为，他们的亚专业应该有 2 个不同的轨道，对于临床医生和/或临床医生教育者来说较短，对于那些追求学术生涯的人来说较长。结论：我们发现关于亚专业培训的意见有很大不同。毫无疑问，这种差异的一部分是由于各个亚专业之间的差异造成的。
BACKGROUND: The American Board of Pediatrics charged a task force to examine fellowship training. As part of that process, a study was conducted to assess the perceptions of fellowship training by those who had recently completed training and those who were in the middle of their careers.METHODS: The American Board of Pediatrics provided a random sample of subspecialists stratified across all 14 subspecialties (N = 5072). Subspecialists were identified either as recent graduates (N = 2702), those who had completed fellowship within the last 5 years or as midcareer subspecialists (N = 2370), and those who completed fellowship 15 to 20 years ago. Two distinct 20-item structured questionnaires were administered by mail, 1 for each group, in January through March 2012. X-2 Statistics were used to assess differences between groups.RESULTS: Response rates were 77.8% for recent graduates and 73.8% for midcareer subspecialists. Overall, most subspecialists described their work primarily as a clinician (36%) or as a clinician-educator (48%). Fewer (12%) reported primarily research. The majority of subspecialists (55%) have full-time academic appointments, but recent graduates are more likely to do so than midcareer subspecialists (62% vs 48%; P < .0001). The majority (60%) believe that the overall length of training in their subspecialty should remain at 3 years. However, almost one-third (29%) believe there should be 2 different tracks in their subspecialty, shorter for clinicians and/or clinician-educators and longer for those pursuing an academic career.CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant range of opinion regarding subspecialty training. Some of this variation is undoubtedly due to differences between the individual subspecialties.