ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2026
Immediate and Longitudinal Outcomes of a National Hands-On Basic Research Course in Rhinology.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Hands-on basic research training opportunities for early-career clinicians are limited, particularly in surgical specialties such as rhinology. To address this gap, the Japanese Rhinologic Society organized a short-term society-led hands-on basic research course. Methods: This mixed-methods program evaluation analyzed postcourse and long-term follow-up questionnaire surveys administered to course participants. The immediate postcourse survey assessed satisfaction, perceived educational value, and motivation using Likert-scale items. A long-term follow-up survey evaluated sustained research engagement, perceived utility of the course, and subsequent academic outcomes, including conference presentations, manuscript preparation, collaborative research, and grant applications. Results: Immediately after the course, 98.4% of participants rated the educational content as highly satisfactory, and 96.8% reported obtaining useful insights applicable to future research. Most participants (93.5%) indicated that the course should be continued, and 71.0% expressed willingness to participate again. At long-term follow-up, 62.9% of respondents were actively engaged in basic research either as team members (40.7%) or as primary investigators (22.2%). The most frequently cited long-term benefits were networking with instructors and peers (74.1%) and increased research motivation (63.0%). Academic outputs following course participation included conference presentations (37.0%), manuscript preparation or submission (33.3%), initiation of new research projects or collaborations (18.5%), and grant applications or funding acquisition (14.8%). Conclusions: A short-term, society-led hands-on basic research course was associated with sustained research engagement and tangible academic outcomes. Such programs may play an important role in fostering the development of clinician-scientists and strengthening research capacity in rhinology. Level of Evidence: 5.
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.