Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Educating the surgeon-scientist: A qualitative study evaluating challenges and barriers toward becoming an academically successful surgeon

  • Lisa M. Kodadek
    ,
  • Muneera R. Kapadia
    ,
  • Navin R. Changoor
    ,
  • Kelli Bullard Dunn
    ,
  • Chandrakanth Are
    ,
  • Jacob A. Greenberg
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Brigham and Women’s Hospital
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Abstract

Background The advancement of surgical science relies on educating new generations of surgeon-scientists. Career development awards (K Awards) from the National Institutes of Health, often considered a marker of early academic success, are one way physician-scientists may foster skills through a mentored research experience. This study aimed to develop a conceptual framework to understand institutional support and other factors leading to a K Award. Methods A national, qualitative study was conducted with academic surgeons. Participants included 15 K Awardees and 12 surgery department Chairs. Purposive sampling ensured a diverse range of experiences. Semistructured, in-depth telephone interviews were conducted. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim, and 2 reviewers analyzed the transcripts using Grounded Theory methodology. Results Participants described individual and institutional factors contributing to success. K Awardees cited personal factors such as perseverance and team leadership skills. Chairs described the K Awardee as an institutional “investment” requiring protected time for research, financial support, and mentorship. Both K Awardees and Chairs identified a number of challenges unique to the surgeon-scientist, including financial strains and competing clinical demands. Conclusion Institutional support for surgeons pursuing K Awards is a complex investment with significant initial costs to the department. Chairs act as stewards of institutional resources and support those surgeon-scientists most likely to be successful. Although the K Award pathway is one way to develop surgeon-scientists, financial burdens and challenges may limit its usefulness. These findings, however, may better prepare young surgeons to develop career plans and identify new mechanisms for academic productivity.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 1456-1465 (10 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Surgery (United States) (Volume 160, Issue 6)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 12/01/2016

Publication status

Published - 12/01/2016

ISSN

0039-6060

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 84981742872
  • PubMed: 27524431

Publication metrics

Metrics

Scopus
citations
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.11
Fractional count
8
Fractional count
0.89
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
71
Citation count
37

Funding Details

A purposive sampling method was used to recruit participants from academic medical institutions from the New England, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, South, and West regions of the United States. Participants were eligible if they were currently employed as surgeons and either (1) funded by an NIH-sponsored Mentored Career Development Award Grant (“K Awardees”) anytime within the past 10 years or (2) employed as a chair or director of a department of surgery (“Chairs”) anytime within the past 10 years by a department with K Awardees. Grants.gov was used to identify K Awardees, and purposive sampling was used to recruit participants. Potential participants were identified by the study investigators (AHH and MRK) and contacted by e-mail. No individuals explicitly declined to participate. Enrollment continued until data analysis demonstrated theoretical saturation. Supported in part by the Association for Academic Surgery and the Society of University Surgeons for the associated cost of an independent professional transcriptionist, as documented within the methods section of this manuscript. Dr Haider is the primary investigator of a contract (AD-1306-03980) with The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) entitled “Patient-centered approaches to collect sexual orientation/gender identity information in the ED” and the principal investigator on a Health Services grant from the Department of Defense through the Henry M. Jackson Foundation entitled “Epidemiology and provider induced collaboration.”