ArticleHNO2026
[Research in university ENT departments-results of a Germany-wide survey on motivation, barriers, and structural conditions].
Article in HNO, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch is a central pillar of academic otorhinolaryngology. However, clinicians increasingly face difficulties with integrating scientific activity into their demanding clinical routines.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess research motivation, perceived barriers, and structural conditions among clinicians at German university ENT departments and to derive practical recommendations for improvement. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn anonymized online survey was distributed among otorhinolaryngologists working in German academic hospitals. Data were analyzed descriptively.
resultsOf 131 respondents, 84% worked fulltime, 89% held a doctoral degree, and 28% had completed habilitation. While extrinsic motivation dominated among doctoral candidates, habilitation aspirants were more driven by intrinsic factors such as scientific curiosity and enjoyment of research. Main obstacles included insufficient staffing, high documentation load, and lack of protected research time. Research was frequently conducted outside of regular working hours. Although research development was regularly addressed by management levels, only 36% felt adequately supported. Moreover, 68% of participants reported no perceived benefit of research engagement for their surgical training opportunities.
conclusionThese findings highlight a systemic tension between clinical demands and research. To ensure sustainable academic productivity in university ENT departments, institutional strategies such as protected time, reduction of the bureaucratic burden, and transparent support mechanisms are needed.
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.