Cargando…

Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency

INTRODUCTION: Emergency medicine (EM) organizations such as the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine and the Institute of Medicine have called for more clinical research as a way of addressing the scarcity of research in EM. Previous investigations have examined funding and productivity in EM res...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilson, Michael P., Vilke, Gary M., Govindarajan, Prasanthi, Itagaki, Michael W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3523811/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23251714
http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2011.6.6722
_version_ 1782253243490893824
author Wilson, Michael P.
Vilke, Gary M.
Govindarajan, Prasanthi
Itagaki, Michael W.
author_facet Wilson, Michael P.
Vilke, Gary M.
Govindarajan, Prasanthi
Itagaki, Michael W.
author_sort Wilson, Michael P.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Emergency medicine (EM) organizations such as the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine and the Institute of Medicine have called for more clinical research as a way of addressing the scarcity of research in EM. Previous investigations have examined funding and productivity in EM research, but whether EM researchers preferentially concentrate on certain patient-related topics is not known. We hypothesized that at least part of the scarcity of EM research is from the tendency of EM researchers, like researchers in other fields, to focus on rarer conditions with higher morbidity or mortality instead of on more common conditions with less acuity. This study compared the frequency of specific medical conditions presenting to emergency departments nationwide with the frequency of emergency physician research on those same conditions. METHODS: This study is a structured retrospective review and comparison of 2 databases during an 11-year span. Principal diagnoses made by emergency physicians as reported by the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey were compared to all first-author publications by emergency physicians as reported in PubMed between 1996 and 2006. Statistics included correlations and linear regression with the number of emergency department (ED) visits per diagnosis as the independent variable and the number of articles published as the dependent variable. RESULTS: During the study period, there was significant concordance between the frequency of presenting conditions in the emergency department and the frequency of research being performed on those conditions, with a high correlation of 0.85 (P < 0.01). More common ED diagnoses such as injury/poisoning, symptoms/ill-defined conditions, and diseases of the respiratory system accounted for 60.9% of ED principal diagnoses and 50.2% of the total research published in PubMed. CONCLUSION: Unlike researchers in other fields, emergency physicians investigate clinical problems in almost the exact proportion as those conditions are encountered in the emergency department. The scarcity of EM research does not have to do with a skewed focus toward less common patient problems.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3523811
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35238112012-12-18 Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency Wilson, Michael P. Vilke, Gary M. Govindarajan, Prasanthi Itagaki, Michael W. West J Emerg Med ED Administration INTRODUCTION: Emergency medicine (EM) organizations such as the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine and the Institute of Medicine have called for more clinical research as a way of addressing the scarcity of research in EM. Previous investigations have examined funding and productivity in EM research, but whether EM researchers preferentially concentrate on certain patient-related topics is not known. We hypothesized that at least part of the scarcity of EM research is from the tendency of EM researchers, like researchers in other fields, to focus on rarer conditions with higher morbidity or mortality instead of on more common conditions with less acuity. This study compared the frequency of specific medical conditions presenting to emergency departments nationwide with the frequency of emergency physician research on those same conditions. METHODS: This study is a structured retrospective review and comparison of 2 databases during an 11-year span. Principal diagnoses made by emergency physicians as reported by the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey were compared to all first-author publications by emergency physicians as reported in PubMed between 1996 and 2006. Statistics included correlations and linear regression with the number of emergency department (ED) visits per diagnosis as the independent variable and the number of articles published as the dependent variable. RESULTS: During the study period, there was significant concordance between the frequency of presenting conditions in the emergency department and the frequency of research being performed on those conditions, with a high correlation of 0.85 (P < 0.01). More common ED diagnoses such as injury/poisoning, symptoms/ill-defined conditions, and diseases of the respiratory system accounted for 60.9% of ED principal diagnoses and 50.2% of the total research published in PubMed. CONCLUSION: Unlike researchers in other fields, emergency physicians investigate clinical problems in almost the exact proportion as those conditions are encountered in the emergency department. The scarcity of EM research does not have to do with a skewed focus toward less common patient problems. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine 2012-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3523811/ /pubmed/23251714 http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2011.6.6722 Text en Copyright © 2012 the authors. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle ED Administration
Wilson, Michael P.
Vilke, Gary M.
Govindarajan, Prasanthi
Itagaki, Michael W.
Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency
title Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency
title_full Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency
title_fullStr Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency
title_full_unstemmed Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency
title_short Emergency Physicians Research Common Problems in Proportion to their Frequency
title_sort emergency physicians research common problems in proportion to their frequency
topic ED Administration
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3523811/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23251714
http://dx.doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2011.6.6722
work_keys_str_mv AT wilsonmichaelp emergencyphysiciansresearchcommonproblemsinproportiontotheirfrequency
AT vilkegarym emergencyphysiciansresearchcommonproblemsinproportiontotheirfrequency
AT govindarajanprasanthi emergencyphysiciansresearchcommonproblemsinproportiontotheirfrequency
AT itagakimichaelw emergencyphysiciansresearchcommonproblemsinproportiontotheirfrequency