Image1

Shayan Shahidi

and 2 more

Shayan Shahidi

and 4 more

Objective: To determine the number of academic papers which have been submitted and published by ENT specialty trainees at each level of higher surgical training. Design: A cross-sectional survey was designed and validated according to the ‘Good Practice in Conduct of and Reporting of Survey Research’ checklist. Settings: Voluntary completion of a web-based questionnaire which was distributed to participants between 11 May – 22 June 2020. Participants: All ENT higher surgical trainees (ST3-ST8 level) in the UK. Main outcomes measured: The number of submitted and published articles by each higher surgical trainee. Comparisons were made between deaneries, training grades and trainees who had achieved a higher degree. Trainees in academic training pathways and those in less than full-time training were analysed separately. Results: One hundred fifty-three ENT speciality trainees across the UK took part in the survey, giving a national response rate of 46.5%. There was a slight male preponderance in the respondents, with 85 males and 68 females completing the survey. Across all years of training, the mean number of first author publications was three and for non-first author publications the mean number was two. For trainees at ST8 level, these numbers were nine and five, respectively. Trainees undertaking a PhD programme produced a mean number of nine first author publications – 5.31 more than the rest (p < 0.0001). Those in academic training pathways achieved 3.48 more publications compared to those who were not (p = 0.092). Trainees with additional undergraduate degrees and those in less than full-time training had an overall lower number of first author publications compared to the general cohort. Conclusions: ENT specialty trainees achieve a higher average number of academic publications than is currently required in order to successfully obtain a Certificate of Completion of Training (CCT). This is particularly the case for trainees in an academic training programme and those with a higher degree. It is the authors’ hope that the data from this study will help in informing and guiding junior trainees, educational supervisors and training programme directors when considering the level of research engagement required for gaining a CCT.