ArticleClinical epidemiology2016
I-determinants for a successful PhD or postdoctoral outcome.
Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of scientometric achievements at PhD and scientific output ten years later for 4,790 academic researchers.PloS one · 2022Article
- Challenges for a successful career as a PhD student.Clinical epidemiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many resources are invested in research training, but very little literature exists on predictors for a successful PhD and postdoctoral training outcome. A PhD program has two overall objectives: to extend knowledge about a hopefully important health topic and to provide extensive training to improve the PhD student's skills through learning research methods and collaboration. A substantial number of PhD students may run into some kind of problem in the course of their PhD program. In this article, some determinants all starting with an "I" and indicative of a good PhD outcome are reported. The successful PhD student can be described as having an Interest in the PhD program, an Incentive for the program, and an Idea of what he or she wants to investigate, showing Initiative, and having high personal Integrity and good Interpersonal relationships. When these so-called I-determinants are present, the likelihood of success in a PhD program is high. More evidence is available for selection of candidates for postdoctoral appointments since it is known that the postdoctoral candidate has completed a PhD program, published papers in peer-reviewed journals, and received awarded grants. However, other characteristics determine a successful transition of the postdoctoral candidate into a research leader. These determinants are Identity, Independence and Image, Implementation ability in terms of being able to implement decisions and projects, working with Innovative and Important topics, having In-depth knowledge of the research topic, being Interactive and Integrated with the scientific community, and Internationally oriented. In conclusion, regardless of the framework of research, the personal characteristics of a researcher play a very important role in the quality of research. Application of some of the principles mentioned in this article might allow decision to reach a more evidence-based way to recruit PhD students and postdoctorals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.