You could be reading the full-text of this article now if you...

If you have access to this article through your institution,
you can view this article in

Publications and Extramural Activities of General Internal Medicine and Medicine Subspecialty Clinician-Educators: A Multicenter Study

Kempainen, Robert R. MD; McKone, Edward F. MD; Rubenfeld, Gordon D. MD, MSc; Scott, Craig S. PhD; Tonelli, Mark R. MD

Academic Medicine:
Featured Topic: Faculty Recruitment and Productivity: Featured Topic Research Report
Abstract

Purpose: Generalist clinician-educators may have more difficulty than specialists satisfying common promotion criteria (peer-reviewed publication and extramural reputation). This study compared publication rates and participation in extramural activities among subspecialist and generalist clinician-educators, and sought to determine the views of clinician-educators on the use of publication and reputation in determining their promotion.

Method: A cross-sectional questionnaire was delivered to 526 clinician-educators identified by the chairs at ten randomly selected U.S. medical schools in 2002.

Results: A total of 270 clinician-educators responded. Medicine subspecialist clinician-educators reported more peer-reviewed publications than did general internal medicine (GIM) faculty (mean 26.4 versus 10.2, p < .003). Independent predictors of having a greater number of peer-reviewed publications were subspecialty membership (p < .01), less time spent in clinic (p < .01), focus of scholarship (p = .01), academic rank (p < .01), higher quartile of National Institutes of Health funding received by respondent's department (p < .01), and years on faculty (p = .03). A greater proportion of GIM faculty reported spending most of their protected time on scholarly activities less amenable to publication (p = .05). A greater proportion of subspecialists felt peer-reviewed publication should be required for promotion (p < .01), but a minority of both groups felt this should necessarily entail original research.

Conclusion: Subspecialist clinician–educators generate significantly more peer-reviewed publications than do their GIM colleagues. Clinician–educators hold diverse views on the role of publication and reputation in determining their promotion.

Author Information

Dr. Kempainen is assistant professor, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Minnesota School of Medicine, Minneapolis. At the time of the study, he was a fellow at the University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle. Dr. McKone is assistant professor, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle. Dr. Rubenfeld is associate professor, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle. Dr. Scott is professor, Department of Medical Education and Biomedical Informatics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle. Dr. Tonelli is associate professor, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Kempainen, University of Minnesota School of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care, MMC 276, 420 Delaware Street S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455.

© 2005 Association of American Medical Colleges