研究能力作为年轻学者职业生涯的影响因素。对德国医学和生命科学博士学位的研究结果和影响。

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
GMS Journal for Medical Education Pub Date : 2023-11-15 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.3205/zma001652
Nurith Epstein, Julia Eberle, Julia Meuleners, Daniel Lachmann, Sonja Heuser, Stefan Herzig, Birgit Neuhaus, Martin R Fischer
{"title":"研究能力作为年轻学者职业生涯的影响因素。对德国医学和生命科学博士学位的研究结果和影响。","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":"40 6","pages":"Doc70"},"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":"{\"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\":\"40 6\",\"pages\":\"Doc70\"},\"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}","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

摘要

背景:从国际范围来看,德国拥有很高的博士生比例。医学和生命科学等领域的博士生比例尤其高,这一趋势源于历史因素。尽管如此,有关博士阶段和早期职业研究人员的全面实证研究,尤其是与结构化博士课程的兴起有关的研究,直到最近才逐渐受到重视:我们介绍了一个调查医学和生命科学领域青年科学家项目的结果。我们在 E-Prom 项目中对这些学科的博士后毕业生进行了定量和定性研究,并强调了研究这一主要领域:结果:我们的分析表明,与传统的个人博士生相比,结构化博士生项目具有一些优势。然而,这些博士生培养方式之间的差异没有预期的那么明显。我们还发现了课程描述与实际执行之间的差异。融入科学界和与研究相关的自我效能感是发表论文数量和科学职业倾向的潜在指标。与生物学家相比,医生表现出较低的研究相关自我效能感,以及较低的科学职业倾向。值得注意的是,我们发现性别差异对女性毕业生不利,这种差异在医学领域更为明显:有证据表明,结构化博士课程的官方表述并不总是与其实际应用相一致,从而限制了其潜在的有效性。因此,应划拨资源,确保这些计划得到连贯一致的执行。鉴于有实证支持社区融合对初级研究人员的益处,应努力促进他们建立联系。此外,我们的研究结果还强调了为年轻女科学家提供更多支持的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
GMS Journal for Medical Education
GMS Journal for Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
30
审稿时长
25 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信