Ten Tips for an Academic Generalist

Haas, David M.

doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000262053.04349.6c

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the perceived degree of research necessity; number of staff, graduate students, and full‐time researchers; amount of research conducted at other sites; collaborative research; and number of international academic conference presentations, conference research presentations, and public or commercial research grants received were significantly correlated with the number of ELRP. Studies have shown that increasing academic productivity, promoting an academic GM department, and hospitalists' academic success were associated with the following: leaders' vision for the nature of the research enterprise; having graduate degree programs; spending more time on research; collaboration with non‐generalist faculties and non‐physician investigators in research; presenting project results; grant applications; and mentorship 3,10‐12 . Those findings and our study results are similar; however, we found that research efforts and the research education system were not significantly associated with the number of ELRP.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

A survey of the research practice in general medicine departments of Japanese universities: A cross‐sectional study

Tago

Watari

Shikino

et al. 2021

J of Gen and Family Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Few studies have focused on research practice in Japanese university general medicine (GM) departments. Methods This is a questionnaire‐based cross‐sectional study to clarify the research achievement and associated factors of Japanese university GM department. Univariate analysis was performed to compare the number of English‐language research publications and explanatory variables. Results Forty‐seven universities responded. Over a 3 years period, the median number of English‐language research publications was 6. Perceived degree of research necessity, staff numbers, collaborative research, conference presentations, and obtaining research grants were significantly associated with a higher number of English‐language research publications. Conclusions While GM research output was found to be limited, numerous associated factors can potentially change Japanese GM departments' research environments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

A survey of the research practice in general medicine departments of Japanese universities: A cross‐sectional study

Tago

Watari

Shikino

et al. 2021

J of Gen and Family Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[1][2][3] Globally, however, the contribution of GMP research remains meager. 2,4,5 General medicine in Japan has a short history. Established in 2018 as the official 19th certified specialty, the scope and definition of its practice are yet to be clearly identified.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Japanese University Hospitals’ and Community Healthcare Facilities’ Research Contributions on PubMed

Watari¹,

Gupta²

2023

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Although research in general medicine is important, the contributions and characteristics of general medicine physicians (GMPs) in university hospitals (UH) and community healthcare facilities (CHF) remains unclear. Therefore, this study examines the popularity of research by affiliation, characteristics of journal publication, annual trends, and differences in impact factors (IFs) of journal publications. Methods This study is a secondary bibliometric analysis of articles in international journals published in PubMed over the past six years (2015–2020). The analysis compared English articles published by either UH- or CHF-affiliated GMPs in Japan in terms of, among other things, article type, research field, and IF. Results Of the 2372 articles analyzed, 1688 (71.2%) were published by physicians affiliated with UHs, 62.6% of which were original. Basic research, international collaboration, and ratio of IFs were significantly higher for such papers. In contrast, the number of CHF articles were significantly higher in the areas of clinical research and practice, with a greater proportion of case reports. There was no significant difference in IF between the disciplines within each affiliation, but the IF was the highest in experimental basic research and the lowest in medical and clinical education. In the six-year time series, the number of original papers by UHs and CHFs increased roughly twofold between 2015 and 2020, but the number of articles in the areas of medical education and healthcare quality and safety remained mostly unchanged. Conclusion The number of international papers published by Japanese GMPs has increased since 2015, particularly in terms of original papers and clinical research from UHs. However, there was no significant difference in the IF between UH and CHF publications. Our findings can guide the development of indicators, research, and education strategies regarding Japanese GMPs’ research performance.

show abstract

“…developed by presenting evidence of its high quality, safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness, with a special focus on quality improvement and safety and medical education. 4,27,[40][41][42][43] In the primary care field, competencies include assessment of lifelong biological and psychosocial needs and patient-centered care planning, including collaborative decision-making and patient self-management; thus, these purely non-biomedical research areas are highly relevant to Japanese general practitioners. Future development could be achieved by improving training systems for conducting such research and promoting collaboration with researchers in the fields of quality improvement, patient safety, and medical education.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Future development could be achieved by improving training systems for conducting such research and promoting collaboration with researchers in the fields of quality improvement, patient safety, and medical education. [40][41][42][43] IFs represent the average number of times an article published in a journal is cited per year. 44 In general, journals with higher IF values are more likely to be considered critical and have intrinsic prestige than journals with lower values.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Trends and Impact Factor on PubMed Among General Medicine Physicians in Japan: A Cross-Sectional Bibliometric Analysis

Watari¹,

Nakano²,

Gupta³

et al. 2022

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Japan created a specialty system for general medicine in 2018. However, Japanese academic generalists’ contribution to research remains unclear. This study examines the popularity of Japanese general medicine research, the characteristics of journal publications, annual trends, and the characteristics/differences among publications in journals with an impact factor (IF). Methods This bibliometric analysis extracted international, English-language, journal articles published on PubMed between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. Analysis included articles with either the first, second, or last author in general medicine. We classified articles according to publication or article type and field of research. We obtained standard descriptive statistics for each publication type. Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test was used to compare nominal variables. For continuous variables, t -tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used, as appropriate. Results Of the 2372 articles analyzed, original articles were most common (56.3%), followed by case reports (30.1%), reviews (7.63%), and letters/others (5.9%). Publication volume increased 2.64-fold annually over 5 years. Clinical research (60.5%) was most common among original articles, followed by basic experimental research (17.5%) and public health/epidemiology (12.7%). Medical quality and safety (4.1%), medical and clinical education (3.1%), and health services (1.42%) received comparatively little attention. Eighty percent of articles were published in journals with IF; however, these journals rarely published case reports. Among original articles, the likelihood of publishing in journals with IF was high for basic laboratory medicine articles with higher IF (median IF 3.83, OR 1.71, 95% CI 2.20–5.95, p=0.044) and lower for clinical education research with the lowest IF (median IF 1.83, OR 0.56, 95% CI 01.8–0.75, p<0.001). Discussion General medicine physicians’ international research output is increasing in Japan; however, research achievements have not been generalized, but rather much influenced by clinical subspecialty backgrounds. This will likely continue unless an academic generalist discipline is established.

show abstract

Ten Tips for an Academic Generalist

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

A survey of the research practice in general medicine departments of Japanese universities: A cross‐sectional study

A survey of the research practice in general medicine departments of Japanese universities: A cross‐sectional study

Comparing Japanese University Hospitals’ and Community Healthcare Facilities’ Research Contributions on PubMed

Research Trends and Impact Factor on PubMed Among General Medicine Physicians in Japan: A Cross-Sectional Bibliometric Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About