Teaching Research to Radiology Residents: A Voluntary Curriculum in Research Design and Manuscript Preparation SS01-05 Sean Dodson, MD, Jacob Eitel, MD, Monica Forbes-Amrhein, MD, PhD, Nicholas Koontz, MD, Bilal Tahir, MD, Darel Heitkamp, MD Department of Radiology & Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine

Disclosures None

Introduction In 1997, the ABR placed increased emphasis on Radiologic Research1,2 Despite creation of the Holman pathway and research tracks within individual training programs, these goals are largely unmet Just 20 DR residents have completed the Holman pathway since the inception3 While resident research needs continued emphasis, additional pathways are needed

Keys to Success Allow trainees time for research Build flexibility into curriculum Don’t force research onto the unwilling Have the right perspective Pretorius, et al. polled medical students regarding establishment of research track in DR residency4 Decide once in residency Research in 4th year for 3-6 months Interest greater in those who desire an academic career

Resident Perceptions National survey of residents by Lam, et al5 1.1 average hours of protected research time per week across US Radiology residencies 38.4% of residents interested in research 59.3% satisfied with the research opportunities available at their institutions

Background Great variation in research by residency program research Costello, et al. laid out their experience6 16 residents per class with 2 allowed to participate in dedicated research curriculum Given 6-9 months of research 2 week intro to research seminar Departmental manuscript workshop RSNA advanced course in grant writing RSNA/AUR/ARS intro to research symposium

Our Experience Research is an important part of residency education, but must be effectively balanced with the best possible clinical training Academic and Research Track (ART) implemented in July 2012 Voluntary supplemental development program designed to teach motivated trainees how to conduct academic research Must be in good academic and professional standing with the school of medicine

Our Experience Oral presentation identifying faculty mentor and outlining research proposal Reviewed by the ART faculty and resident committee Once accepted, residents receive two research days per rotation

Our Experience Curriculum Monthly didactics Navigating the IRB process Utilization of statistical and research related software packages Review of experimental design Manuscript preparation Manuscript review Monthly or bi-monthly meetings devoted to reviewing progress

Our Experience Quarterly project updates reviewed by the ART resident and faculty committee Ensure participants are on successful path Identify those who need intervention ART faculty committee Radiology researchers and imaging scientists Attend the meetings Function as research advisors

Purpose Many research programs exist throughout the country Goal Few have evaluated the actual success of these programs Goal Evaluate productivity of Residents participating in the Academic and Research Track at Indiana University from July 2012 – June 2015

Hypothesis There is a significant difference in academic productivity between residents in ART and those not in ART

Methods July 2012, ART participation offered to all IU Diagnostic Radiology residents Productivity of participating residents was tracked over three consecutive years (2012-2015) and compared to non-participant residents in the same program Publication in a peer-reviewed journal or oral presentation at a national conference were used as metrics of academic production Student’s t-test was performed

Results Residents Residents published or presented Publications and Presentations ART Members 13 46 Non-ART Members 62 32 81

Results ART Non-ART Mean 3.5 1.3 t Stat 3.3 P (T <= t) two-tail 0.002 t Critical two-tail 2.2

Discussion ART members highly productive academically 100% (n = 13) have presented at national meeting or published in peer-reviewed journal Compared to 51.6% of non-ART residents (n = 32) 2.7x more academically productive per capita 3.5 academic outputs per ART member versus 1.3 outputs per non-ART member Gained valuable experience with research design, data collection, manuscript preparation, & manuscript review

Conclusion Academic productivity of residents participating in a dedicated academic & research track is significantly greater than non-participants ART members may be better equipped to pursue careers in academic medicine

Questions? Sean Dodson, MD Nick Koontz, MD Darel Heitkamp, MD scdodson@iupui.edu Nick Koontz, MD nakoontz@iupui.edu Darel Heitkamp, MD dheitka@iupui.edu

References Baker C. Making Imaging Research a Part of Radiology Resident Training. Acad Radiol 2013; 20:135-136 Wallner PE, et al. The American Board of Radiology Holman Research Pathway: 10-Year Retrospective Review of the Program and Participant Performance. Int J Radiation 2013; 85(1):29-34 Holman Research Pathway Graduates. Available at http://www.theabr.org/sites/all/themes/abr-media/pdf/Holman%20Research%20Pathway%20Graduates.pdf accessed 3/14/16 Pretorius ES, Solomon JA, Stribling C. Medical Student Attitudes toward Inclusion of a Research Year within Diagnostic Radiology Residency: A Survey of Students Participating in the 2002 NRMP Match. Acad Radiol 2003; 10(1):77-82 Lam CZ, et al. Radiology Resident Satisfaction With Their Training and Education in the United States: Effect of Program Directors, Teaching Faculty, and Other Factors on Program Success. AJR 2016; 206:1-10 Costello JR, et al. Establishing a New Radiology Residency Research Track. Acad Radiol 2013; 20(2):243-248