ArticleDer Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft2010
[Working conditions for young trainees and junior researchers in ophthalmology: results of a recent online questionnaire].
Article in Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Basic research in ophthalmology in Germany and its international context].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2017Review
- [The situation of residents in ophthalmology in Germany: Results of an online survey].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2015Article
- [Outcomes and health services research in ophthalmology].Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft · 2014Article
- Postgraduate ophthalmic training: how do we compare?Eye (London, England) · 2011Article
- Ophthalmology Training in Greece as Perceived by Resident Ophthalmologists in the Times of Crisis: A National, Questionnaire-based Survey.Journal of current ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBy evaluating the current working conditions of young ophthalmology researchers in Germany, potential deficits should be highlighted to create a greater transparency. PATIENTS AND
methodsWithin the time period between October 2008 and March 2009 all residents and junior researchers at university eye hospitals and teaching hospitals were invited to participate in an open online survey to retrieve validated data on four different topics.
resultsA total of 187 validated residents filled out the questionnaire consisting of 48 items. The mean age of the 84 women and 77 men was 32±4 years and 48% of the physicians reported exceeding the normal working hours (by law) 4-5 times per week. Of the respondents 76% ruled out ever being supported in their research activities by a temporary release from clinical work. Nevertheless, several indices indicated enthusiastic career aspirations and research activities. The career success scale was greater than 5 in 70 (37%) of the participants (mean: 4.5). An adequate access to ophthalmologic online journals was indicated only by 59% of the people surveyed and 45% of scientists required additional support by English native speakers when writing a scientific manuscript. All physicians interviewed would decide in favor of ophthalmology again when asked which discipline would be chosen and 28% of the residents would not apply for a job at the same institution again. The atmosphere, access to surgical training and the quality of teaching were specified as the most important factors in the career decision in favor of a certain university.
conclusionSome deficits of the training and working conditions could be clearly identified in the view of ophthalmology residents. Facing the unbroken high attractiveness of clinical disciplines, the provided insights can support further training programs and research incentives to improve the scientific output and ophthalmologic research in the long term.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21153578What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.