[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.204.247.205. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 132
Citations 0
Comment & Response
May 2014

Resident, Research, and Rewards

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;140(5):479. doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2014.424

To the Editor For many otolaryngology–head and neck (ORL-HNS) training programs, getting residents to participate in research can be a chore. Even though this may be a residency review committee/Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education mandate, the entire process can be daunting. This begins with choosing the subject, developing the protocol, often getting institutional review board (IRB) approval, performing the work, collating the data, writing the manuscript and all its revisions, and then, hopefully, getting it presented or published. There is no easy way to shortcut the process, but perhaps generating an incentive to accomplish the work may stimulate the effort. Chang and Mills1 addressed this in their article “Effect of a Reward System on Resident Research Productivity,” recently published in JAMA Otolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery. Briefly, they implemented a reward system to incentivize residents along the research path with financial equivalents that can be used toward books, academic travel, equipment, or society dues, for example. They used historical controls as the comparison group. They found that the number of IRB-approved project increased with statistical significance for case reports and retrospective reviews. Other publication types showed no statistical change.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×