Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30910824›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2019

Survey of UK histopathology consultants' attitudes towards academic and molecular pathology.

Scarlet Brockmoeller, Caroline Young, Jessica Lee, Mark J Arends, Bridget S Wilkins, Gareth J Thomas, Karin A Oien, Louise Jones, Keith D Hunter

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Scarlet Brockmoeller *Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James, Pathology and Data Analytics, Leeds Institute of Cancer & Pathology, Leeds, UK S.F.Brockmoeller@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7452-5833
Caroline Young *Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James, Pathology and Data Analytics, Leeds Institute of Cancer & Pathology, Leeds, UK.
Jessica LeeCatapult Medicines Discovery, Cheshire, UK.
Mark J ArendsCancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, Edinburgh, UK.
Bridget S WilkinsSt Thomas' Hospital London and Royal Hampshire Country Hospital, Winchester, United Kingdom.
Gareth J ThomasCancer Sciences Unit, University of Southampton, Southhampton, UK.
Karin A OienInstitute of Cancer Sciences, College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Louise JonesBarts Cancer Institute, London, UK.
Keith D HunterAcademic Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine, Pathology and Surgery, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Barts Health NHS Trust · GBEdinburgh Cancer Research · GBMedicines Discovery Catapult · GBSt James's University Hospital · GBSt Thomas' Hospital · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N005813/1Wellcome Trust 203524/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAcademic pathology is facing a crisis; an ongoing decline in academic pathology posts, a paucity of academic pathologist's in-training and unfilled posts at a time when cellular pathology departments are challenged to deliver increasing numbers of molecular tests. The National Cancer Research Institute initiative in Cellular & Molecular Pathology commissioned a survey to assess attitudes of cellular pathology consultants towards research in order to understand barriers and identify possible solutions to improve this situation. As cellular pathology is encompassing an increasing number of diagnostic molecular tests, we also surveyed the current approach to and extent of training in molecular pathology.

methodsThe survey was distributed to all UK-based consultant pathologists via the Pathological Society of Great Britain & Ireland and Royal College of Pathologist networks. Heads of Department were contacted separately to obtain figures for number of academic training and consultant posts.

results302 cellular pathologists completed the survey which represents approximately 21% of the total cellular histopathology workforce. Most respondents (89%) had been involved in research at some point; currently, 22% were undertaking research formally, and 41% on an informal basis. Of those previously involved in research, 57% stopped early in their consultant career. The majority of substantive academic posts were Professors of which 60% had been in post for >20 years. Most respondents (84%) used molecular pathology in diagnostic work, independent of where they worked or the length of time in post. Notably, 53% of consultants had not received molecular pathology training, particularly more senior consultants and consultants in district general hospitals.

conclusionsThe survey reveals that the academic workforce is skewed towards senior individuals, many of whom are approaching retirement, with a missing cohort of 'junior consultant' academic pathologists to replace them. Most pathologists stop formal research activity at the beginning of a consultant career. While molecular pathology is an increasing part of a pathologist's workload, the majority of consultant cellular pathologists have not received any formal molecular training.

Indexed as

Academies and InstitutesAttitude of Health PersonnelBiomedical ResearchHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePathology, MolecularClinical CompetenceConsultantsHealth Services Needs and DemandHealth WorkforceHumansJob DescriptionNeeds AssessmentPathologistsRetirementSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomacademic pathologymolecular pathologyworkforce

Identifiers

PMID30910824
PMCPMC6580784
OpenAlexW2924385310

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.