The role of research competence as an influencing factor for the careers of young academics. Findings and implications from studies on doctorates in medicine and life sciences in Germany.
Nurith Epstein, Julia Eberle, Julia Meuleners, Daniel Lachmann, Sonja Heuser, Stefan Herzig, Birgit Neuhaus, Martin R Fischer
{"title":"The role of research competence as an influencing factor for the careers of young academics. Findings and implications from studies on doctorates in medicine and life sciences in Germany.","authors":"Nurith Epstein, Julia Eberle, Julia Meuleners, Daniel Lachmann, Sonja Heuser, Stefan Herzig, Birgit Neuhaus, Martin R Fischer","doi":"10.3205/zma001652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>When viewed internationally, Germany boasts a high rate of doctoral candidates. Fields such as medicine and life sciences have a notably high proportion of doctoral students, a trend rooted in historical factors. Despite this, comprehensive empirical studies concerning the doctoral phase and early-career researchers, especially in relation to the rise of structured doctoral programmes, have only recently gained traction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We present findings from a project investigating young scientists in medicine and life sciences. Postdoctoral graduates from these disciplines were examined both quantitatively and qualitatively within the E-Prom projects, emphasizing the primary domain of research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis indicates some benefits of structured doctoral programmes over traditional individual doctorates. However, the disparities between these doctoral approaches are less pronounced than anticipated. We also identified discrepancies between the programme descriptions and their actual execution. Integration into the scientific community and research-related self-efficacy are potential indicators of publication output and inclination towards a scientific career. Physicians exhibited lower research-related self-efficacy and a lesser tendency towards a scientific career than biologists. Notably, we found gender disparities disadvantaging female graduates, with these disparities being more marked in medicine.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is evidence to suggest that official representations of structured doctoral programmes do not always align with their practical applications, limiting their potential effectiveness. Therefore, resources should be allocated to ensure the consistent execution of these programmes. Given the empirical evidence supporting the benefits of community integration for junior researchers, efforts should be made to facilitate their networking. Additionally, our findings emphasize the necessity of providing enhanced support for young female scientists.</p>","PeriodicalId":45850,"journal":{"name":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10728667/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001652","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: When viewed internationally, Germany boasts a high rate of doctoral candidates. Fields such as medicine and life sciences have a notably high proportion of doctoral students, a trend rooted in historical factors. Despite this, comprehensive empirical studies concerning the doctoral phase and early-career researchers, especially in relation to the rise of structured doctoral programmes, have only recently gained traction.
Methods: We present findings from a project investigating young scientists in medicine and life sciences. Postdoctoral graduates from these disciplines were examined both quantitatively and qualitatively within the E-Prom projects, emphasizing the primary domain of research.
Results: Our analysis indicates some benefits of structured doctoral programmes over traditional individual doctorates. However, the disparities between these doctoral approaches are less pronounced than anticipated. We also identified discrepancies between the programme descriptions and their actual execution. Integration into the scientific community and research-related self-efficacy are potential indicators of publication output and inclination towards a scientific career. Physicians exhibited lower research-related self-efficacy and a lesser tendency towards a scientific career than biologists. Notably, we found gender disparities disadvantaging female graduates, with these disparities being more marked in medicine.
Conclusions: There is evidence to suggest that official representations of structured doctoral programmes do not always align with their practical applications, limiting their potential effectiveness. Therefore, resources should be allocated to ensure the consistent execution of these programmes. Given the empirical evidence supporting the benefits of community integration for junior researchers, efforts should be made to facilitate their networking. Additionally, our findings emphasize the necessity of providing enhanced support for young female scientists.
期刊介绍:
GMS Journal for Medical Education (GMS J Med Educ) – formerly GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung – publishes scientific articles on all aspects of undergraduate and graduate education in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, pharmacy and other health professions. Research and review articles, project reports, short communications as well as discussion papers and comments may be submitted. There is a special focus on empirical studies which are methodologically sound and lead to results that are relevant beyond the respective institution, profession or country. Please feel free to submit qualitative as well as quantitative studies. We especially welcome submissions by students. It is the mission of GMS Journal for Medical Education to contribute to furthering scientific knowledge in the German-speaking countries as well as internationally and thus to foster the improvement of teaching and learning and to build an evidence base for undergraduate and graduate education. To this end, the journal has set up an editorial board with international experts. All manuscripts submitted are subjected to a clearly structured peer review process. All articles are published bilingually in English and German and are available with unrestricted open access. Thus, GMS Journal for Medical Education is available to a broad international readership. GMS Journal for Medical Education is published as an unrestricted open access journal with at least four issues per year. In addition, special issues on current topics in medical education research are also published. Until 2015 the journal was published under its German name GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. By changing its name to GMS Journal for Medical Education, we wish to underline our international mission.