美国学术医学的急剧衰落。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Richard Balon, Mary K Morreale
{"title":"美国学术医学的急剧衰落。","authors":"Richard Balon, Mary K Morreale","doi":"10.12788/acp.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recent coronavirus pandemic has made us more aware of the gradual decline of academic medicine. Although much has been written about the systemic problems in medicine and academia (mostly in the context of burnout and well-being), the problems in academic medicine extend well beyond these concerns. Structural problems in academic medicine exist within all parts of its tripartite mission: education, clinical care, and research. With clinical care, there are tedious requirements for documentation in difficult-to-navigate electronic medical record systems, demands on productivity in the form of ever-increasing allocated Relative Value Units (RVUs), and senseless demands from managed-care organizations. All of these clinical demands reduce the time for teaching, which, ironically, university deans expect us instructors to increase. Similarly, education has been increasingly regulated by what has been referred to as the “medical-education industrial complex.” Regulatory agencies have introduced changes with possibly negative consequences and no evident benefit. The promise that the new accreditation system would make residency training programs easier to manage has not materialized and, actually, the opposite appears true. In addition, unfunded mandates of questionable value have been introduced, such as the Clinical Skills Verification examination. Academic research—at least in psychiatry—has been experiencing an “intellectual crisis,” leading to the conclusion that “evidence-based medicine does not appear to provide an adequate scientific background for challenges of clinical practice in psychiatry and needs to be integrated with clinical judgment.” Some argue that the scope of evidence-based medicine is limited and should be combined with practice-based evidence in making clinical decisions. And despite the glow that research funding brings to investigators and administrators, the sad fact is that, for the institution, research is a money loser. The pandemic has lifted the veil on even more serious threats to academic medicine. In a recent article, Johns Hopkins University Professor Richard Balon, MD Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences and Anesthesiology Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan, USA","PeriodicalId":50770,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical Psychiatry","volume":"32 4","pages":"225-227"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The precipitous decline of academic medicine in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Richard Balon, Mary K Morreale\",\"doi\":\"10.12788/acp.0006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The recent coronavirus pandemic has made us more aware of the gradual decline of academic medicine. Although much has been written about the systemic problems in medicine and academia (mostly in the context of burnout and well-being), the problems in academic medicine extend well beyond these concerns. Structural problems in academic medicine exist within all parts of its tripartite mission: education, clinical care, and research. With clinical care, there are tedious requirements for documentation in difficult-to-navigate electronic medical record systems, demands on productivity in the form of ever-increasing allocated Relative Value Units (RVUs), and senseless demands from managed-care organizations. All of these clinical demands reduce the time for teaching, which, ironically, university deans expect us instructors to increase. Similarly, education has been increasingly regulated by what has been referred to as the “medical-education industrial complex.” Regulatory agencies have introduced changes with possibly negative consequences and no evident benefit. The promise that the new accreditation system would make residency training programs easier to manage has not materialized and, actually, the opposite appears true. In addition, unfunded mandates of questionable value have been introduced, such as the Clinical Skills Verification examination. Academic research—at least in psychiatry—has been experiencing an “intellectual crisis,” leading to the conclusion that “evidence-based medicine does not appear to provide an adequate scientific background for challenges of clinical practice in psychiatry and needs to be integrated with clinical judgment.” Some argue that the scope of evidence-based medicine is limited and should be combined with practice-based evidence in making clinical decisions. And despite the glow that research funding brings to investigators and administrators, the sad fact is that, for the institution, research is a money loser. The pandemic has lifted the veil on even more serious threats to academic medicine. In a recent article, Johns Hopkins University Professor Richard Balon, MD Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences and Anesthesiology Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan, USA\",\"PeriodicalId\":50770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Clinical Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"32 4\",\"pages\":\"225-227\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Clinical Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12788/acp.0006\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12788/acp.0006","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The precipitous decline of academic medicine in the United States.
The recent coronavirus pandemic has made us more aware of the gradual decline of academic medicine. Although much has been written about the systemic problems in medicine and academia (mostly in the context of burnout and well-being), the problems in academic medicine extend well beyond these concerns. Structural problems in academic medicine exist within all parts of its tripartite mission: education, clinical care, and research. With clinical care, there are tedious requirements for documentation in difficult-to-navigate electronic medical record systems, demands on productivity in the form of ever-increasing allocated Relative Value Units (RVUs), and senseless demands from managed-care organizations. All of these clinical demands reduce the time for teaching, which, ironically, university deans expect us instructors to increase. Similarly, education has been increasingly regulated by what has been referred to as the “medical-education industrial complex.” Regulatory agencies have introduced changes with possibly negative consequences and no evident benefit. The promise that the new accreditation system would make residency training programs easier to manage has not materialized and, actually, the opposite appears true. In addition, unfunded mandates of questionable value have been introduced, such as the Clinical Skills Verification examination. Academic research—at least in psychiatry—has been experiencing an “intellectual crisis,” leading to the conclusion that “evidence-based medicine does not appear to provide an adequate scientific background for challenges of clinical practice in psychiatry and needs to be integrated with clinical judgment.” Some argue that the scope of evidence-based medicine is limited and should be combined with practice-based evidence in making clinical decisions. And despite the glow that research funding brings to investigators and administrators, the sad fact is that, for the institution, research is a money loser. The pandemic has lifted the veil on even more serious threats to academic medicine. In a recent article, Johns Hopkins University Professor Richard Balon, MD Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences and Anesthesiology Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan, USA
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The ANNALS publishes up-to-date information regarding the diagnosis and /or treatment of persons with mental disorders. Preferred manuscripts are those that report the results of controlled clinical trials, timely and thorough evidence-based reviews, letters to the editor, and case reports that present new appraisals of pertinent clinical topics.
×
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