Scholarly Tracks in Emergency Medicine
Scholarly Tracks in Emergency Medicine
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1553-2712.2010.00890.x
复制
发表时间：
2010-10-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Hopson, Laura R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Regan, Linda;Stahmer, Sarah;Hopson, Laura R.
在过去的十年中，一些急诊医学（EM）的住院医师项目已经将学术课程纳入了他们的课程。学术轨道的目标是确定一个利基，其中每个学员专注于他或她的学术工作期间居住。本文的目的是讨论目前的使用，结构和居民学术轨道的成功。一个由住院医师项目负责人组成的工作组在其住院医师项目中实施了学术跟踪，通过急诊医学住院医师主任理事会（CORD）列表服务传播的调查整理了他们的方法、实施和早期结果。在2009年的CORD学术大会上，举行了一次会议，约有80名CORD成员参加，会议的结果得到了传播和讨论。该小组审查了文献，讨论了轨道的实施和维护过程中所面临的成功和挑战，并制定了一份建议清单，以成功地将学术轨道结构纳入居住计划。我们的信息来自八个培训项目（五个3年和三个4年项目）的经验，每年8到14名住院医生。两个项目已经与学术轨道合作了8年。建议包括为每个轨道制定明确的目标和目的，将轨道主题与教师的专业知识相匹配，保护教师和居民的时间，并为居民提供足够的指导。总之，学术轨道鼓励学员在住院医师培训期间在EM内发展学术或临床利基。好处包括提高居民的整体满意度，增加成功获得教师和奖学金的位置后居住，并增加学术工作的生产。我们相信，这种模式也将鼓励更多的学员选择学术医学的职业。
Over the past decade, some residency programs in emergency medicine (EM) have implemented scholarly tracks into their curricula. The goal of the scholarly track is to identify a niche in which each trainee focuses his or her scholarly work during residency. The object of this paper is to discuss the current use, structure, and success of resident scholarly tracks. A working group of residency program leaders who had implemented scholarly tracks into their residency programs collated their approaches, implementation, and early outcomes through a survey disseminated through the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) list-serve. At the 2009 CORD Academic Assembly, a session was held and attended by approximately 80 CORD members where the results were disseminated and discussed. The group examined the literature, discussed the successes and challenges faced during implementation and maintenance of the tracks, and developed a list of recommendations for successful incorporation of the scholarly track structure into a residency program. Our information comes from the experience at eight training programs (five 3-year and three 4-year programs), ranging from 8 to 14 residents per year. Two programs have been working with academic tracks for 8 years. Recommendations included creating clear goals and objectives for each track, matching track topics with faculty expertise, protecting time for both faculty and residents, and providing adequate mentorship for the residents. In summary, scholarly tracks encourage the trainee to develop an academic or clinical niche within EM during residency training. The benefits include increased overall resident satisfaction, increased success at obtaining faculty and fellowship positions after residency, and increased production of scholarly work. We believe that this model will also encourage increased numbers of trainees to choose careers in academic medicine.