Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31578310›Full record

ArticleJCI insight2019

The national MD-PhD program outcomes study: Relationships between medical specialty, training duration, research effort, and career paths.

Lawrence F Brass, Myles H Akabas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCI insight, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing 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

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. An Analysis of Curricular Structures in MD-PhD Programs in the United States.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. The development, validity, and reliability of the Researcher Investment Tool.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. An Analysis of Curricular Structures in MD-PhD Programs in the United States.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Lawrence F BrassDepartments of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Myles H AkabasDepartment of Physiology & Biophysics, Neuroscience, and Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MD-PhD programs were established in the 1950s as a new curriculum for training physician-scientists. Since then, the number of programs has grown considerably; however, concerns about the health of the US physician-scientist workforce have grown, as well. The largest attempt to date to assess whether MD-PhD programs are fulfilling their mission was the national MD-PhD program outcomes study, which was released as an American Association of Medical Colleges report in 2018. That study gathered information on 10,591 graduates of 80 MD-PhD programs over 50 years and concluded that most graduates have followed careers consistent with their training. Here, we provide additional analysis, drawing on survey data provided by 64.1% of alumni (75.9% of alumni with valid email addresses), plus program-supplied current workplace data for survey nonresponders to examine the relationships between medical specialty choices, training duration, research effort, and success in obtaining research funding. The results show that residency choices affect critical aspects of the physician-scientist career path, including where graduates work, how long it takes them to obtain an independent appointment in academia, and the amount of their professional time that is devoted to research. Entrants into MD-PhD programs are older, on average, now than when the programs were first established and are taking longer to graduate and complete postgraduate training. Although we found a positive relationship between professional effort devoted to research and the likelihood of having research funding, we found little evidence that the increase in training duration produces an increase in subsequent research effort. These data should provide both guidance for anyone considering this career path and insights for those who train and hire the next generation of physician-scientists.

Indexed as

Career ChoiceEducation, MedicalEducation, Medical, GraduatePhysiciansBiomedical ResearchFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleOutcome Assessment, Health CareResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesTeachingTraining SupportUnited StatesWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID31578310
PMCPMC6795497

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.