Follow-up of American Cancer Society Special Postdoctoral Research Fellowship recipients.
A follow-up study of the 44 recipients of American Cancer Society, Inc., Special Postdoctoral Research Fellowship from 1962 to 1973 revealed that 11 of 21 M.D. candidates obtained their second (Ph.D.) degree at the end of training. By contrast, all but one among the 23 Ph.D. candidates were awarded the second (M.D.) degree. A great majority of either group remain in active research, regardless of whether or not they obtained the second degree. A very high percentage of their research is cancer related. (+info)
Tuberculin skin testing among economically disadvantaged youth in a federally funded job training program.
Low income, medically underserved communities are at increased risk for tuberculosis. Limited population-based national data are available about tuberculous infection in young people from such backgrounds. To determine the prevalence of a positive tuberculin skin test among economically disadvantaged youth in a federally funded job training program during 1995 and 1996, the authors evaluated data from medical records of 22,565 randomly selected students from over 100 job training centers throughout the United States. An estimated 5.6% of students had a documented positive skin test or history of active tuberculosis. Rates were highest among those who were racial/ethnic minorities, foreign born, and (among foreign-born students) older in age (p < 0.001). Weighted rates (adjusting for sampling) were 1.3% for white, 2.2% for Native American, 4.0% for black, 9.6% for Hispanic, and 40.7% for Asian/Pacific Islander students; rates were 2.4% for US-born and 32.7% for foreign-born students. Differences by geographic region of residence were not significant after adjusting for other demographic factors. Tuberculin screening of socioeconomically disadvantaged youth such as evaluated in this study provides important sentinel surveillance data concerning groups at risk for tuberculous infection and allows recommended public health interventions to be offered. (+info)
Student loan debt does not predict female physicians' choice of primary care specialty.
OBJECTIVE: There has never been a conclusive test of whether there is a relation between ultimately choosing to be a primary care physician and one's amount of student loan debt at medical school graduation. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: To test this question, we examined data from the Women Physicians' Health Study, a large, nationally representative, questionnaire-based study of 4,501 U.S. women physicians. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We found that the youngest physicians were more than five times as likely as the oldest to have had some student loan debt and far more likely to have had high debt levels (p <.0001). However, younger women physicians were also more likely to choose a primary care specialty (p <.002). There was no relation between being a primary care physician and amount of indebtedness (p =.77); this was true even when the results were adjusted for the physicians' decade of graduation and ethnicity (p =.79). CONCLUSIONS: Although there may be other reasons for reducing student loan debt, at least among U.S. women physicians, encouraging primary care as a specialty choice may not be a reason for doing so. (+info)
Medicaid's role in financing graduate medical education.
Medicaid is the second-largest explicit payer of graduate medical education (GME). All but five states pay for GME ($2.4 billion in 1998). As states rapidly move their Medicaid populations to managed care, Medicaid support for GME is subject to change. Just sixteen states and the District of Columbia carve out Medicaid GME payments from capitated rates to managed care plans and rechannel them to teaching programs. Concurrently, managed care has motivated several states to distribute Medicaid GME funds in ways more explicitly accountable to the public. Ten states require that GME payments be directly linked to state policy goals intended to vary the distribution of or limit the health care workforce. (+info)
Lessons from the London Initiative Zone Educational Incentives funding: associations between practice characteristics, funding, and courses undertaken.
BACKGROUND: Following the Tomlinson report of 1992, London Initiative Zone Educational Incentives (LIZEI) funding was introduced for a three-year period to improve recruitment, retention, and educational opportunities for general practitioners working within inner London. AIM: To test the hypothesis that general practices that show evidence of good organisation achieved better access to LIZEI funding than less organised practices. METHOD: Observational practice-based study involving all 164 general practices in EAst London and the City Health Authority during the first two years of the scheme, April 1995 to March 1997. RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed that higher levels of LIZEI funding were associated with practices where there was evidence of good organisation, including higher targets for cervical cytology screening and immunisation rates for under two-year-olds, better asthma prescribing, and training status. Using ten practice and population explanatory variables, multiple regression models were developed for fundholding and non-fundholding practices. Among non-fundholding practices, the asthma prescribing ratio was the variable with the greatest predictive value, explaining 14.7% of the variation in LIZEI funding between practices. Strong positive associations existed between taking further degrees and diplomas, practice size, training, and non-fundholding status. CONCLUSION: Larger practices, training practices, and those that demonstrated aspects of good practice organisation gained more LIZEI funding: an example of the 'inverse funding law'. Practices within a multifund, based in the Newham locality, gained LIZEI funding regardless of practice organisation. Networks of practices, and, potentially, primary care groups, have a role in equalising the opportunities for education and development between practices in east London. (+info)
A survey of postgraduate (specialist) orthodontic education in 23 European countries.
This paper reports on a survey of the duration, funding, and assessment of postgraduate specialist orthodontic training, the requirement for postgraduate training prior to entering specialist orthodontic training and registration of specialist orthodontists in Europe. A questionnaire and explanatory letter were mailed to all members of the EURO-QUAL BIOMED II project. Answers were validated during a meeting of project participants and by fax, when necessary. Completed questionnaires which were subsequently validated, were returned by orthodontists from 23 countries. The results indicated that a period of postgraduate training, prior to entering specialist orthodontic training was required in 12 of the responding countries. Specialist orthodontic training was reported as lasting 2 years in three countries, 3 years in 17, and for 4 years in three. Part-time training was reported as a possibility in four countries. In 21 of the 23 countries specialist training was reported to take place in full or part within universities, with some training taking place in government clinics in four countries. In five countries some or all training was reported to take place in specialist practices. Training was said to be funded solely or partially by governments in 15 of the 23 countries, to be solely self-funded in five countries, and partly or solely funded by universities in six countries. A final examination at the end of specialist training was reported to be held in 21 of the 23 countries. The nature of this examination varied widely and there was no such examination in two countries. Twelve of the 23 countries reported that they had a specialist register for orthodontics; 11 that they had no register. In none of the countries surveyed was there a requirement for those on a register to undergo periodic reassessment of competence once they are on the register. It was concluded that there was wide diversity in all aspects of specialist orthodontic training and registration within the countries surveyed. (+info)
Impact of the National Cancer Act on grant support.
The National Cancer Act of 1971 resulted in a threefold increase in appropriations for the National Cancer Institute (NCI) within a 4-year period. A major effect was the increase for the Grants Program from +93 million in fiscal year 1970 to more than +280 million in 1974. Grant programs, administered by the Division of Cancer Research Resources and Centers, account for more than 50% of the total NCI extramural research budget and fall into four broad categories: research, training (including fellowships), cancer control, and construction. With the exception of the training area, funding for all grant programs has increased dramatically as a result of the Act. The ocst of research has also risen, as reflected in the average twofold increase in cost per NCI traditional grant over the past 10 years. This rise in cost is due to a number of factors, including inflation, more sophisticated equipment and supplies and, in some cases, more ambitious projects. The principal type of research grants include traditional awarded for investigator-initiated research projects, and center, awarded for comprehensive and specialized cancer centers. While support for traditional grants has remained in the forefront of NCI funding, money for cancer center grants has increased at a greater rate in recent years, reflecting emphasis on the development of cancer centers throughout the country. Compared to other institutes at the NIH, NCI is in a very favorable funding position; in fiscal year 1974 NCI awarded more money for its research grant programs than all of the other institutes (with the exception of the National Heart and Lung Institue) obligated for their entire budgets. The Act has stimulated a large increase in new cancer applications received, and the increased funding has made it possible for NCI to award a greater number of grants. Young investigators have competed well for the additional monies made available by the Act and funding for cancer research outside the United States, still only a small part of NCI's budget, has increased. (+info)
A survey of continuing professional education for orthodontists in 23 European countries.
This paper reports on a survey of the organization, forms and methods of funding continuing professional education (CPE) for those providing orthodontics in 23 European countries in 1997. A postal questionnaire was sent to all members of the EURO-QUAL II BIOMED project, who came from 28 countries, together with an explanatory letter. Answers were validated during a meeting of project participants and by further correspondence, when necessary. Completed questionnaires, which were subsequently validated, were returned by orthodontists from 23 countries and indicated that orthodontic CPE took place in 22 of the 23 countries surveyed. A number of different bodies were reported as organizing orthodontic CPE. This task was most frequently performed by orthodontic societies (in 22 out of 23 countries), but a number of other bodies were also involved. Practical technique courses were reported as taking place in 20 countries. Other frequently occurring forms of orthodontic CPE were lectures (in 18 countries) and study groups (in 15 countries). Orthodontists were reported as financing their CPE in 22 countries; others, who contributed to some or all of the costs, were the Government (in six countries), employers (in four countries), universities (in four countries), and a dental company (in one country). It was concluded that some orthodontic CPE took place in the vast majority of the countries surveyed, and was invariably organized by and paid for, wholly or in part by orthodontists themselves. (+info)