header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Trauma

NATURE OR NURTURE? ANALYSING THE PUBLISHING BEHAVIOUR OF ORTHOPAEDIC SPECIALTY TRAINEES ACROSS THE FOUR SCOTTISH DEANERIES

Scottish Committee for Orthopaedics and Trauma (SCOT)



Abstract

Involvement in research forms a mandatory part of Trauma & Orthopaedic specialty training. Evidence of publication is a compulsory criterion for attaining Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT). The publishing behaviour of orthopaedic trainees from all four deaneries in Scotland was examined (East, North, South East and West of Scotland).

A literature search was performed for Scottish orthopaedic trainees achieving CCT between July 2005–July 2010 using Knowledge Network and PubMed databases. Data collected included date of publication, article type, journal, publishing institute, number of authors and position of trainee within authors.

There was no significant difference in mean number of publications/trainee prior to specialty training across the four deaneries (EOS 0.18; NOS 0.18; SES 0.25; WOS 0.73). The number of publications/trainee during training was statistically significantly higher in SES (mean 6.31; mode 9; median 4) compared to WOS (2.23;0;1), NOS (2.18;1;2) and EOS (1.72;1;1). However, there was no correlation between a trainee's number of publications during training and post–CCT. There was no significant difference for mean number of authors/trainee publication during training across the four deaneries (range 3.38–3.63), nor mean position of trainee in list of authors (range 1.37–1.67).

This study highlights important differences and notable similarities in publishing behaviour during orthopaedic training across the Scottish deaneries. It suggests that rates of publication relate to factors during training and that publishing during training is not predictive of future behaviour. This research may be of interest to trainees, training committees and orthopaedic departments in future appointments.