ReviewPhysiological reports2024
Physiologists as medical scientists: An early warning from the German academic system.
Review in Physiological reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Schmiedeberg Medal for Thomas Wieland: an artist of G-protein signaling.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2025Article
- Computational modelling of biological systems now and then: revisiting tools and visions from the beginning of the century.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025Review
- Physiologists as medical scientists: An early warning from the German academic system.Physiological reports · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
"Medical scientists" are postgraduate investigators who are engaged in biomedical research, and either hold a biomedical PhD or are qualified in medicine but do not participate in patient care. Medical scientists constitute ~40% of staff at medical faculties and >90% at nonuniversity medical research institutions in Germany. However, medical scientists in Germany face limited long-term career prospects and a lack of dedicated training and support programmes. They also face time limits on their career progression arising from national academic employment legislation, and imminent reforms by the German government are likely to make this worse. Nevertheless, recent developments in the educational landscape including the introduction of increasingly focused MSc, pre-PhD, and doctoral programmes to train medically aware basic scientists, as well as improved general recognition of the roles and relevance of medical scientists in health research, are encouraging. Physiologists have taken essential steps to improve the recognition of medical scientists in Germany by introducing a "specialist physiologist" qualification; this initiative could be applied to support medical scientists in other fields and countries. In this review, we describe the particular challenges facing medical scientists in Germany and make recommendations that may apply to other academic systems.
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.