Mr. Feneley et Rcl. Feneley, THE CONTRIBUTION OF RESEARCH TO UROLOGICAL TRAINING IN THE UNITED-KINGDOM, British Journal of Urology, 81(2), 1998, pp. 193-198
Objectives To report the findings of a questionnaire survey among cons
ultant urologists in the United Kingdom (UK) designed to examine their
personal experience of research and their opinion of its contribution
in urological training.Methods A questionnaire was sent to 205 consul
tant urologists in the UK and 154 (75%) replied. Their replies were ex
amined to ascertain the time spent in research, the production of publ
ications, presentations and in gaining a higher university degree. Sub
sequent research activity was also related to the achievement of these
endpoints. Results Among the 154 consultant urologists who replied, 1
30 (84%) had undertaken research during their training, for a period v
arying from 6 months to more than 2 years, Among the 130, 99 (76%) con
sidered this to have been well spent; 76 (58%) obtained a higher degre
e, 86 (66%) achieved at least three publications in peer-reviewed jour
nals and 90 (69%) had given at least five presentations to learned soc
ieties. Inadequate supervision in particular was cited as contributing
to underachievement and motivation was also considered important to s
uccess. Conclusions The contribution of research in urological trainin
g has been assessed traditionally by the presentation of a thesis to a
university for a higher degree, but alternative methods of assessment
should perhaps be sought for those wishing to spend less than 18 mont
hs in research.