Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26719322›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2015

Clinician-scientist MB/PhD training in the UK: a nationwide survey of medical school policy.

Ashton Barnett-Vanes, Guiyi Ho, Timothy M Cox

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Ashton Barnett-VanesFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK Faculty of Medicine, St George's University of London, London, UK.
Guiyi HoFaculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Timothy M CoxDepartment of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study surveyed all UK medical schools regarding their Bachelor of Medicine (MB), Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) (MB/PhD) training policy in order to map the current training landscape and to provide evidence for further research and policy development.

settingDeans of all UK medical schools registered with the Medical Schools Council were invited to participate in this survey electronically. PRIMARY: The number of medical schools that operate institutional MB/PhD programmes or permit self-directed student PhD intercalation. SECONDARY: Medical school recruitment procedures and attitudes to policy guidance.

findings27 of 33 (81%) registered UK medical schools responded. Four (14%) offer an institutional MB/PhD programme. However, of those without institutional programmes, 17 (73%) permit study interruption and PhD intercalation: two do not (one of whom had discontinued their programme in 2013), three were unsure and one failed to answer the question. Regarding student eligibility, respondents cited high academic achievement in medical studies and a bachelor's or master's degree. Of the Medical schools without institutional MB/PhD programmes, 5 (21%) have intentions to establish a programme, 8 (34%) do not and 3 were unsure, seven did not answer. 19 medical schools (70%) considered national guidelines are needed for future MB/PhD programme development.

conclusionsWe report the first national survey of MB/PhD training in the UK. Four medical schools have operational institutional MB/PhD programmes, with a further five intending to establish one. Most medical schools permit study interruption and PhD intercalation. The total number MB/PhD students yet to graduate from medical school could exceed 150, with 30 graduating per year. A majority of medical school respondents to this survey believe national guidelines are required for MB/PhD programme development and implementation. Further research should focus on the MB/PhD student experience. Discussion regarding local and national MB/PhD policies between medical schools and academic stakeholders are needed.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, GraduateEducation, Medical, UndergraduateMedical StaffSchools, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomAUDITBASIC SCIENCESEDUCATION & TRAINING (see Medical Education & Training)MEDICAL EDUCATION & TRAINING

Identifiers

PMID26719322
PMCPMC4710833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.