Doctoral programs to train future leaders in clinical and translational science

Galen E. Switzer, Georgeanna F W B Robinson, Doris M. Rubio, Nicole Fowler, Wishwa N. Kapoor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs. METHOD: In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones. RESULTS: Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research. CONCLUSIONS: Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1332-1339
Number of pages8
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume88
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

leader
science
Students
student
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Program Development
program planning
Translational Medical Research
health
Medical Schools
Medical Students
Research
educational program
Curriculum
training program
Cross-Sectional Studies
funding
physician
Physicians
Education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Education

Cite this

Doctoral programs to train future leaders in clinical and translational science. / Switzer, Galen E.; Robinson, Georgeanna F W B; Rubio, Doris M.; Fowler, Nicole; Kapoor, Wishwa N.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 88, No. 9, 09.2013, p. 1332-1339.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Switzer, Galen E. ; Robinson, Georgeanna F W B ; Rubio, Doris M. ; Fowler, Nicole ; Kapoor, Wishwa N. / Doctoral programs to train future leaders in clinical and translational science. In: Academic Medicine. 2013 ; Vol. 88, No. 9. pp. 1332-1339.
@article{68a7f3c97fd74dc1919f3c67cfb00e7b,
title = "Doctoral programs to train future leaders in clinical and translational science",
abstract = "PURPOSE: Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs. METHOD: In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones. RESULTS: Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research. CONCLUSIONS: Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.",
author = "Switzer, {Galen E.} and Robinson, {Georgeanna F W B} and Rubio, {Doris M.} and Nicole Fowler and Kapoor, {Wishwa N.}",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1097/ACM.0b013e31829e7bce",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "88",
pages = "1332--1339",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Doctoral programs to train future leaders in clinical and translational science

AU - Switzer, Galen E.

AU - Robinson, Georgeanna F W B

AU - Rubio, Doris M.

AU - Fowler, Nicole

AU - Kapoor, Wishwa N.

PY - 2013/9

Y1 - 2013/9

N2 - PURPOSE: Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs. METHOD: In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones. RESULTS: Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research. CONCLUSIONS: Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.

AB - PURPOSE: Although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has made extensive investments in educational programs related to clinical and translational science (CTS), there has been no systematic investigation of the number and characteristics of PhD programs providing training to future leaders in CTS. The authors undertook to determine the number of institutions that, having had received NIH-funded Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs), currently had or were developing PhD programs in CTS; to examine differences between programs developed before and after CTSA funding; and to provide detailed characteristics of new programs. METHOD: In 2012, CTS program leaders at the 60 CTSA-funded institutions completed a cross-sectional survey focusing on four key domains related to PhD programs in CTS: program development and oversight; students; curriculum and research; and milestones. RESULTS: Twenty-two institutions had fully developed PhD programs in CTS, and 268 students were earning PhDs in this new field; 13 institutions were planning PhD programs. New programs were more likely to have fully developed PhD competencies and more likely to include students in medical school, students working only on their PhD, students working on a first doctoral degree, and students working in T1 translational research. They were less likely to include physicians and students working in clinical or T2 research. CONCLUSIONS: Although CTS PhD programs have similarities, they also vary in their characteristics and management of students. This may be due to diversity in translational science itself or to the relative infancy of CTS as a discipline.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883657484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883657484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31829e7bce

DO - 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31829e7bce

M3 - Article

C2 - 23899901

AN - SCOPUS:84883657484

VL - 88

SP - 1332

EP - 1339

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 9

ER -