Protected Time, Resources, and Expectations for Academic Oncology Clinical Research Physicians

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: In recent years, fewer physicians have entered research-related careers. For those who do, successful high-quality research requires dedicated time and financial support. These resources may vary over time and across centers. METHODS: In 2019 and 2021, we distributed surveys on physician faculty recruitment, effort, and evaluation to NCCN Member Institutions participating in the NCCN Best Practices Committee. We employed linear and logistic mixed-effect models to assess changes between years and Spearman's rank correlation to evaluate associations between variables. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 16 of 30 invited institutions (53%) in 2019 and by 21 of 31 invited institutions (68%) in 2021. Eight institutions completed both surveys, with a total of 29 completing one or both. Across institutions, the proportion of clinical research faculty ranged from 20% to 90%. Clinical research faculty start-up packages were <$50,000/year at 43% of institutions and lasted ≤3 years at 81%. By contrast, physician-scientist faculty start-up packages were <$50,000/year at 10% of institutions and lasted ≤3 years at 48%. For clinical research faculty, outpatient clinic requirements ranged from 1.5 to 3.5 half-days per week. Although this requirement did not change from 2019 to 2021 (mean, 2.1 vs 2.3 half-days; P=.37), inpatient service requirements decreased (P=.02). Clinical requirements were not associated with institutional faculty distribution or the number of early-career grants received. The proportion of centers that considered clinical productivity in the evaluation of clinical research physician faculty success was 47% in 2019 and 65% in 2021, but this difference was not statistically significant (P=.44). CONCLUSIONS: Across cancer centers participating in the NCCN Best Practices Committee, clinical research physicians account for a varying proportion of physician faculty, have a wide range of clinical requirements, and appear to be increasingly evaluated according to clinical productivity.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.