Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System

Introduction: Ensuring high-quality scholarly output by graduate medical trainees can be a challenge. Within many specialties, including emergency medicine (EM), it is unclear what constitutes appropriate resident scholarly activity. We hypothesized that the quantity and quality of scholarly activit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lauren Evans, Sarah Greenberger, Rachael Freeze-Ramsey, Amanda Young, Crystal Sparks, Rawle Seupaul, Travis Eastin, Carly Eastin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: eScholarship Publishing, University of California 2023-08-01
Series:Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
Online Access:https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7dg1x28t
_version_ 1797660222956765184
author Lauren Evans
Sarah Greenberger
Rachael Freeze-Ramsey
Amanda Young
Crystal Sparks
Rawle Seupaul
Travis Eastin
Carly Eastin
author_facet Lauren Evans
Sarah Greenberger
Rachael Freeze-Ramsey
Amanda Young
Crystal Sparks
Rawle Seupaul
Travis Eastin
Carly Eastin
author_sort Lauren Evans
collection DOAJ
description Introduction: Ensuring high-quality scholarly output by graduate medical trainees can be a challenge. Within many specialties, including emergency medicine (EM), it is unclear what constitutes appropriate resident scholarly activity. We hypothesized that the quantity and quality of scholarly activity would improve with a clearer guideline, including a point system for eligible scholarly activities. Methods: A resident Scholarly Activity Guideline was implemented for EM residents in a university setting. The guideline consists of a point system in which point values, ranging from 1–10, are assigned to various types of scholarly activities. Residents must earn at least 10 points and present their work to meet their scholarly graduation requirement. We tracked scholarly activities for graduates from the classes of 2014–2020, with the guideline being implemented for the class of 2016. In a blind analysis, we compared median total points per resident, mean counts of the Boyer model of scholarship components per resident, and mean counts of significant scholarly output per resident before vs after the guideline was implemented. Significant scholarly output was defined as an implemented protocol, a research project with data collection and analysis, a research abstract presentation, or an oral abstract presentation. Results: Among 64 residents analyzed, 48 residents used the guideline. We found that median points per resident increased after the guideline was implemented (median, interquartile range: before 7 [7], after 11 [10, 13], P = 0.002). Post-guideline scholarly activities were found to represent more of Boyer’s components of scholarship [mean before 0.81 [SD 0.40], mean after 1.52 [SD 0.71], mean difference 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.332 ± 1.09, P < 0.001. There was no difference in the mean significant scholarly output per resident (mean before 1.38 [SD 1.02], mean after 1.02 [SD 1.00], mean difference 0.35, 95% CI 0.93 ± 0.23, P = 0.23). Conclusion: Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline point system significantly increased the quantity and, by one of two measures, increased the quality of scholarly output in our program. Our point-based guideline successfully incorporated traditional and modern forms of scholarship that can be tailored to resident interests.
first_indexed 2024-03-11T18:26:41Z
format Article
id doaj.art-211802cccbb9482084b97cd9afafc23c
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1936-900X
1936-9018
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-11T18:26:41Z
publishDate 2023-08-01
publisher eScholarship Publishing, University of California
record_format Article
series Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
spelling doaj.art-211802cccbb9482084b97cd9afafc23c2023-10-13T16:02:12ZengeScholarship Publishing, University of CaliforniaWestern Journal of Emergency Medicine1936-900X1936-90182023-08-0124586186710.5811/westjem.6034660346Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point SystemLauren Evans0Sarah Greenberger1Rachael Freeze-Ramsey2Amanda Young3Crystal Sparks4Rawle Seupaul5Travis Eastin6Carly Eastin7University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Little Rock, ArkansasIntroduction: Ensuring high-quality scholarly output by graduate medical trainees can be a challenge. Within many specialties, including emergency medicine (EM), it is unclear what constitutes appropriate resident scholarly activity. We hypothesized that the quantity and quality of scholarly activity would improve with a clearer guideline, including a point system for eligible scholarly activities. Methods: A resident Scholarly Activity Guideline was implemented for EM residents in a university setting. The guideline consists of a point system in which point values, ranging from 1–10, are assigned to various types of scholarly activities. Residents must earn at least 10 points and present their work to meet their scholarly graduation requirement. We tracked scholarly activities for graduates from the classes of 2014–2020, with the guideline being implemented for the class of 2016. In a blind analysis, we compared median total points per resident, mean counts of the Boyer model of scholarship components per resident, and mean counts of significant scholarly output per resident before vs after the guideline was implemented. Significant scholarly output was defined as an implemented protocol, a research project with data collection and analysis, a research abstract presentation, or an oral abstract presentation. Results: Among 64 residents analyzed, 48 residents used the guideline. We found that median points per resident increased after the guideline was implemented (median, interquartile range: before 7 [7], after 11 [10, 13], P = 0.002). Post-guideline scholarly activities were found to represent more of Boyer’s components of scholarship [mean before 0.81 [SD 0.40], mean after 1.52 [SD 0.71], mean difference 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.332 ± 1.09, P < 0.001. There was no difference in the mean significant scholarly output per resident (mean before 1.38 [SD 1.02], mean after 1.02 [SD 1.00], mean difference 0.35, 95% CI 0.93 ± 0.23, P = 0.23). Conclusion: Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline point system significantly increased the quantity and, by one of two measures, increased the quality of scholarly output in our program. Our point-based guideline successfully incorporated traditional and modern forms of scholarship that can be tailored to resident interests.https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7dg1x28t
spellingShingle Lauren Evans
Sarah Greenberger
Rachael Freeze-Ramsey
Amanda Young
Crystal Sparks
Rawle Seupaul
Travis Eastin
Carly Eastin
Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
title Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System
title_full Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System
title_fullStr Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System
title_full_unstemmed Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System
title_short Improvement in Resident Scholarly Output with Implementation of a Scholarly Activity Guideline and Point System
title_sort improvement in resident scholarly output with implementation of a scholarly activity guideline and point system
url https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7dg1x28t
work_keys_str_mv AT laurenevans improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT sarahgreenberger improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT rachaelfreezeramsey improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT amandayoung improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT crystalsparks improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT rawleseupaul improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT traviseastin improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem
AT carlyeastin improvementinresidentscholarlyoutputwithimplementationofascholarlyactivityguidelineandpointsystem