ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
Survey on status quo and development needs of research and innovation capabilities of young researchers at university-affiliated hospitals in China: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of an index system for the scientific literacy of medical staff: a modified Delphi study in China.BMC medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Researches in China on the innovation ability and development needs of young scientific research talents is not enough. The survey is aimed to shed light on the status quo, problems, and development needs of research and innovation capabilities among young researchers in terms of orientation, innovation atmosphere, platform support, training mechanisms, and training measures. Methods: From January to March 2022, a randomly-selected method was used to conduct a web-based self-made questionnaire survey on young talents in 6 university affiliated hospitals in 5 provinces in China. Intergroup comparisons were based on the chi-square test or Fisher' exact test. Results: Overall, 586 usable responses had been collected, including 233 from full-time researchers and 353 from part-time researchers. 182 (31.06%) researchers believe that they have the ability to master innovative theories, tools and methods, 136 (23.21%) researchers choose "working alone". Compared with part-time research talents, the proportion of full-time research talents self-assessed as "very good" in scientific research innovation ability is higher (χ Conclusions: Full-time and part-time scientific researchers have different requirements for capital investment, support for scientific research platforms, leadership demonstrations by senior peers, and a good atmosphere for scientific and technological innovation. Thus, it is important to promote innovation capacity-building among young researchers at university-affiliated hospitals (UAHs) by enhancing both talent training and introduction in a hierarchical, classified, multidimensional, and stepwise manner.
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.