Impact of a Resident Research Grant on Scholarly Output During Pediatric Residency.

Lack of research funding is a known barrier to performing research during residency. Receipt of an institution-based resident research grant was associated with increased scholarly output. Programs should consider creating funding mechanisms to promote scholarship during residency.

Research during pediatric residency training: outcome of a senior resident block rotation.

BACKGROUND: The Pediatric Residency Review Committee requires programs to provide a curriculum that advances residents' knowledge of the basic principles of research. In July 2002, the Boston Combined Residency Program instituted a 3-month career-development block (CDB) rotation. During the rotation residents pursue an academic or clinical project under mentorship by a faculty member. OBJECTIVE: Our objective for this study was to evaluate the outcome of the CDB rotation since it was implemented. METHODS: A survey was administered to 165 residents who completed the CDB rotation. RESULTS: Of 165 residents, 136 (82%) responded to the survey. Of 122 residents who reported the type of project they conducted, 59 (48%) completed a clinical/health services project, 24 (20%) completed a project in education or curriculum development, and 7 (6%) worked in basic science. Thirty-five residents (27%) received funding to support their work. Thirty-five residents (26%) presented at national meetings such as the Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting. Fifteen (11%) residents have had manuscripts accepted for publication, and 22 (16%) additional residents have submitted manuscripts for publication. Factors associated with successful publication included having received funding (odds ratio: 3.37 [95% confidence interval: 1.34-8.42]) and the nature of the research project (odds ratio: 3.55 [95% confidence interval: 1.40-9.04]). The majority of residents (84%) stated that the CDB rotation enhanced residency training. CONCLUSIONS: A dedicated academic rotation that includes protected time, senior faculty mentorship, and program funding, can lead to productive research accomplishments by pediatric residents. Support of academic work during residency training may encourage engagement in a variety of academically oriented activities.

Gender differences in research grant applications for pediatric residents.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have reported gender differences in research grant applications and funding outcomes for medical school faculty. Our goal was to determine whether similar patterns exist at the resident level and, if so, to explore possible explanations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all applications to an internal, mentored research grant fund at a large academic pediatric residency program from 2003 to 2008. We determined whether gender differences existed for application characteristics and outcomes and defined significant predictors of success. RESULTS: During the 5-year period, the fund supported 42 (66%) of 64 applications. Among all applicants, men were more likely than women to hold an advanced research degree. Men requested more money than women and obtained more favorable application scores. Funding success rates were not statistically different between male and female applicants. Among funded applicants, men received higher awards than women, although the percentage of requests funded was the same. In a multiple regression analysis, advanced degree was the significant independent predictor of successful funding outcome. Controlling for advanced degree attenuated the association between gender and timing of application, type of project, dollars requested, and dollars awarded; however, even after controlling for advanced degree, women had inferior grant scores compared with men. CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences existed in research grant applications and funding among pediatric residents that mirrored faculty patterns. Among residents, these differences were explained in part by the correlation of male gender with holding an advanced research degree.