Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Clinical Medicine Journal

  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Clinical Medicine Journal

clinmedicine Logo
  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Collaborative research has direct patient benefit and merits recognition

Dmitri Nepogodiev and James C Glasbey
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.18-2-189
Clin Med April 2018
Dmitri Nepogodiev
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
Roles: Academic Department of Surgery
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James C Glasbey
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
Roles: Academic Department of Surgery
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

We are pleased that Donovan and Sangha noted our call for collaborative research to be fully recognised by postgraduate training selection panels.1 However, we are concerned by their conflation of research collaboratives with ‘soft target’ journals which are financially motivated to publish work of such low scientific value, that it would not pass through peer review into a mainstream journal.2

Trainee research collaboratives conduct high impact multicentre studies, such as the West Midlands Research Collaborative's randomised controlled trial ‘Dexametasone reduces emesis after major surgery’ (DREAMS). This 1350 patient trial demonstrated that administration of dexamethasone at induction reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting by one-third.3 In the evidence-based medicine era, only multicentre studies like DREAMS can change clinical practice. By necessity these are delivered by large, complex teams; 300 coinvestigators contributed to DREAMS across 45 hospitals.

Although DREAMS recruited fewer than 5 patients per coinvestigator, opening the trial at each site, completing mandatory training, screening patients for eligibility, consenting and randomising patients, delivering interventions, and completing follow-up required a significant investment of time over many months; this does not equate to the ‘minimal effort’ outlined in Donovan and Sangha's letter.

Regardless of whether individuals participate ‘for the love of it’, research collaboratives enable students and trainees to lead and contribute to research that has the potential to improve patient care. Furthermore, it equips them with practical academic skills,4 promoting further engagement with research and quality improvement across the NHS.5 STARSurg's International Journal of Surgery letter argued that it is in patients’ interests for participation in high-quality research such as DREAMS to be fairly recognised by selection bodies on par with other types of publication.6 This position is supported by the core surgical training, neurosurgery, urology, and general surgery Specialty Association Committees who now recognise collaborative research in award of Certificates of Completion of Training.

We agree that it would be inappropriate to award points in selection processes for short letters. However, recognition of collaborative research is not only wholly merited, but also essential to ensure trainees continue to contribute to high-impact research for patient benefit.

Conflicts of interest

DN was the guarantor for Student Audit and Research in Surgery's (STARSurg) International Journal of Surgery letter. JCG is the current senior lead of STARSurg (www.starsurg.org, @STARSurgUK).

Footnotes

  • ↵*both authors contributed equally

  • © Royal College of Physicians 2018. All rights reserved.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Donovan K
    , Sangha G. The application game. Clin Med 2017;17:586.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Shen C
    , Björk BC. ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics. BMC Med 2015;13:230.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. DREAMS Trial Collaborators and West Midlands Research Collaborative
    . Dexamethasone versus standard treatment for postoperative nausea and vomiting in gastrointestinal surgery: randomised controlled trial (DREAMS Trial). BMJ 2017;357:j1455.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Chapman SJ
    , Glasbey JC, Khatri C, et al. Promoting research and audit at medical school: evaluating the educational impact of participation in a student-led national collaborative study. BMC Med Educ 2015;15:1.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Nepogodiev D
    , Chapman SJ, Kolias AG, et al. The effect of trainee research collaboratives in the UK. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017;2:247–8.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Collaborative STARSurg
    . Students’ participation in collaborative research should be recognised. Int J Surg 2017;39:234–7.
    OpenUrl
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Collaborative research has direct patient benefit and merits recognition
Dmitri Nepogodiev, James C Glasbey
Clinical Medicine Apr 2018, 18 (2) 189; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.18-2-189

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Collaborative research has direct patient benefit and merits recognition
Dmitri Nepogodiev, James C Glasbey
Clinical Medicine Apr 2018, 18 (2) 189; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.18-2-189
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Conflicts of interest
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • JAK-inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for refractory primary systemic vasculitides
  • Response
  • Functional disorders and chronic pain
Show more Letters to the editor

Similar Articles

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home
clinmedicine Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians