TY - JOUR
T1 - Research Pioneers in Emergency Medicine—Reflections on Their Paths to Success and Advice to Aspiring Researchers
T2 - A Qualitative Study
AU - Coates, Wendy C.
AU - Yarris, Lalena M.
AU - Clarke, Samuel O.
AU - Runde, Daniel
AU - Kurth, Jacqueline
AU - Fowlkes, Emilie
AU - Jordan, Jaime
N1 - Funding Information:
We identified potential research subjects in a rolling fashion and interviewed 10 research pioneers before discontinuing data collection. One potential subject declined, citing lack of continuation in an academic position. Saturation was achieved after the seventh subject. Interviews of 3 additional subjects who were already scheduled continued as planned to meet our goal of sex and geographic diversity. Using our snowball technique, we also noted that the pool of suggested potential interviewees centered on our invited subjects. Demographic data and research accomplishments are summarized in . Seven subjects completed additional training (fellowship, advanced degree, or both). Subjects received substantial funding from federal agencies, major foundations, and state governments ( ). Table 1 Tables 1 and 2
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American College of Emergency Physicians
PY - 2019/6
Y1 - 2019/6
N2 - Study objective: Research in basic, translational, and clinical emergency medicine has made great strides since the formalization of emergency medicine as a specialty. Our objective is to identify and analyze strategies used by emergency medicine research pioneers to inform further advancement of research in emergency medicine, particularly for aspiring researchers and those in emerging areas, using emergency medicine medical education as one example. Methods: This was a prospective, grounded-theory, qualitative study, using a constructivist/interpretivist paradigm. Leading basic science, translational, and clinical emergency medicine researchers who completed residency before 1995 were eligible for structured interviews. Thematic coding followed an iterative process until saturation was reached. A theoretic model was developed and analyzed. Results: Research pioneers valued advanced methodological training and mentorship. Barriers to funding were lack of recognition of emergency medicine as a specialty, absence of a research history, and lack of training and funding resources. Deliberate interventions to improve emergency medicine research included educational sessions at national meetings, external (to emergency medicine)mentor pairings, targeted funding by emergency medicine organizations, and involvement with funding agencies. Pioneers facilitate research excellence by serving as mentors and allocating funds or protected time to develop researchers. To advance emerging subfields of research in emergency medicine, pioneers recommend advanced methodological training that is specific to the area, deliberate mentorship, and the formation of research consortia to conduct generalizable outcomes-based studies. Conclusion: Research pioneers in emergency medicine cite mentorship, advanced skills obtained through fellowship or graduate degrees, deliberate collaboration with experienced researchers, support from emergency medicine organizations, and forming networks as the cornerstones of success.
AB - Study objective: Research in basic, translational, and clinical emergency medicine has made great strides since the formalization of emergency medicine as a specialty. Our objective is to identify and analyze strategies used by emergency medicine research pioneers to inform further advancement of research in emergency medicine, particularly for aspiring researchers and those in emerging areas, using emergency medicine medical education as one example. Methods: This was a prospective, grounded-theory, qualitative study, using a constructivist/interpretivist paradigm. Leading basic science, translational, and clinical emergency medicine researchers who completed residency before 1995 were eligible for structured interviews. Thematic coding followed an iterative process until saturation was reached. A theoretic model was developed and analyzed. Results: Research pioneers valued advanced methodological training and mentorship. Barriers to funding were lack of recognition of emergency medicine as a specialty, absence of a research history, and lack of training and funding resources. Deliberate interventions to improve emergency medicine research included educational sessions at national meetings, external (to emergency medicine)mentor pairings, targeted funding by emergency medicine organizations, and involvement with funding agencies. Pioneers facilitate research excellence by serving as mentors and allocating funds or protected time to develop researchers. To advance emerging subfields of research in emergency medicine, pioneers recommend advanced methodological training that is specific to the area, deliberate mentorship, and the formation of research consortia to conduct generalizable outcomes-based studies. Conclusion: Research pioneers in emergency medicine cite mentorship, advanced skills obtained through fellowship or graduate degrees, deliberate collaboration with experienced researchers, support from emergency medicine organizations, and forming networks as the cornerstones of success.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057625305&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057625305&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.10.033
DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.10.033
M3 - Article
C2 - 30529113
AN - SCOPUS:85057625305
SN - 0196-0644
VL - 73
SP - 555
EP - 564
JO - Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
JF - Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
IS - 6
ER -