| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Correspondence |
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada E-mail: btsui{at}ualberta.ca
We very much appreciate the comments made by Drs. Finley et al. from Dalhousie, Drs. Donati and Hardy from Université de Montréal, and Dr. Cheng from the University of Western Ontario. We are very pleased that our report has stimulated an interesting and important discussion. In responding to these letters, there was no intention on our part to under-represent the research carried out by individuals in various institutions, and we very clearly pointed out the limitations of our investigation in the manuscript. These limitations were also highlighted by Professor Byrick in his accompanying Editorial.1
Using the principle that one research project represents one manuscript, regardless of the number of authors involved, we had hoped and intended to capture the vast number of research projects taking place within each institution, in which an anesthesiologist played a significant role. Our main goal was to determine the total amount of research that was taking place and not the total number of manuscripts authored or co-authored by individual faculty or staff members. If one also relies upon information from departmental annual reports to determine the number of publications in a given year, there is a significant risk of counting the same publication multiple times. Using the methodology reported in our manuscript, there was little risk of that happening. Furthermore, by confining our search to the corresponding author, we felt confident that the key contributor or the individual over-seeing the project was identified. This methodology greatly reduced the risk of multiple counting of the same article, and may also account for some of the discrepancies reported by the correspondents. Concern was also expressed that we failed to capture articles published in non-anesthesia journals. Our search strategy did capture those articles, if the anesthesiologist was the corresponding author and therefore likely played an important role in the project.
We are most encouraged to note the positive impact of a mandatory research rotation for residents, on research productivity at l’Université de Montréal. These data very strongly support our contention that research should be mandatory in all training programs, and make a strong case for a mandatory rotation in research. If we do not expose our residents to research at some point during their training, there is little hope that this experience will be gained later on. While appreciating that most residents have limited interest or desire to pursue a career in research, it is our view that exposure of residents to the research process will help to inculcate within them the importance of research in maintaining and enhancing anesthesia as a profession, and not as a trade. Our graduates should have some understanding of the processes involved and the importance of research, and should appreciate the need to support the efforts of those who do become involved in research. Just as students are expected to be familiar with calculus and organic chemistry before entering medical school (with no expectation of their becoming mathematicians or chemists), it is important for our residents to understand how the information in our clinical textbooks was generated from basic science and clinical research.
We thank the correspondents for their helpful comments and we are grateful for the opportunity to clarify our position. We must also re-emphasize that it was never our intention to capture absolute numbers of publications. Instead, our intent was to examine the trends of research activity taking place in Anesthesiolgy Departments across the country, regardless of the number of individuals involved. We hope that we captured most, if not all, of the most important work published in our discipline during the period in question. If we did not do so, we are truly disappointed.
Reference
1 Byrick RJ. Anesthesia research productivity in Canada: role of academic departments (Editorial). Can J Anesth 2006; 53: 217–21.
Related articles in CJA:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
