Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19383309›Full record

ArticleMolecular oncology2008

Cancer research in the UK: A policy review of the junior academic clinical faculty.

Richard Sullivan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular oncology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Richard SullivanDepartment of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK. r.sullivan@lse.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite huge sums spent on academic clinical raining worldwide there is surprisingly little research to inform policymakers. This study addresses the junior faculty in the UK's cancer research community through both current Fellows and senior clinicians and policymakers. Funding organisations under the National Cancer Research Institute umbrella currently support 176 junior faculty fellows (studying towards MD [2 year postgraduate research degree] or PhD) with the majority in medical oncology (49%). Craft specialities (surgery and pathology) had a very modest presence in the junior faculty. The cancer research specific junior faculty makes up a major component of all available junior faculty from National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) partners (ca. 31%) and is supported both by direct funding to Fellows and via junior faculty positions on clinical programme grants. There was almost universal support for the value of the research experience despite only two thirds of the current cohort expressing a desire to continue to the next level (Clinician Scientist grade). Major issues identified were mentorship, supervision time, pay parity and fit with new UK Clinical Research Collaboration / Modernising Medical Careers (UKCRC/MMC) clinician training programme.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchMedical OncologyAcademic Medical CentersHealth PolicyResearch Support as TopicUnited KingdomWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID19383309
PMCPMC5543842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.