Starting Line for Scholarly Activity in New Residency Programs: Lessons Learned for Institutional Success.

Background: One focal point of Graduate Medical Education (GME) is scholarly activity and its integration into clinical practice by evidence-based learning. Program directors and educational leaders view scholarly work as the foundation for continuing resident education; however, the high demand of scholarly activity can be cumbersome for newly accredited residency programs.

Methods: We reviewed all scholarly activity over a 2-y period (2015-2017) involving three new GME programs at a single institution (internal medicine, surgery, and transitional year). A voluntary anonymous online survey was distributed to all residents to assess their perceptions and expectations regarding research, review prior research experience, and analyze any barriers or successes within the research program.

Results: The survey was distributed to 61 residents with a response rate of 59% (36/61), including postgraduate years 1-5. Respondent demographics included males (55.6%), ages 26-30 y (63.9%), and respondents commonly being postgraduate year-1 (58.3%) level. In total, 171 scholarly activities were recorded. Survey review of resident basic research knowledge, concepts, and experience included preresidency research (91.7%), prior scholarly activity (79.2%), and interest to meet career goals (66.7%). Barriers or delays in research were lack of structured curriculum (50%), technical support (45.8%), research experience (37.5%), and interest (33%).

Conclusions: Newly accredited GME training programs can avoid an unnecessary institutional deficiency in scholarly activity by developing a structured and comprehensive research curriculum. Resident engagement, developing a mentor-mentee relationship, and research experience before residency can allow a successful research program.