ArticleHeart rhythm2025
Factors of engagement in research after graduation from EP fellowship: An HRS survey.
Article in Heart rhythm, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Balancing clinical responsibilities and research during electrophysiology fellowship.HeartRhythm case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe declining number of electrophysiologists pursuing academic research careers could have a negative impact on innovation for patients with heart rhythm disorders in the coming decades.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to explore determinants of research engagement after graduation from electrophysiology (EP) fellowship programs and to evaluate associated barriers and opportunities.
methodsA mixed methods survey of EP fellows and early-career electrophysiologists was conducted, drawing from Heart Rhythm Society members. The survey encompassed 20 questions on demographics, research involvement, perceived research barriers, and perspectives on research time and opportunities. Responses were analyzed with robust Poisson regression.
resultsOf 259 respondents, those with dedicated research blocks during their fellowship had a significantly higher interest in future research (relative risk, 1.15; P = .04). The number of peer-reviewed publications modestly influenced interest in continued research (relative risk, 1.0034 per publication; P < .0001), but there was no relationship to gender or race. Educational resources, networking opportunities, mentorship, funding, and protected time to enhance research engagement were important themes in the qualitative analysis, whereas key barriers to post-fellowship research were lack of mentorship, insufficient resources, and time constraints, in that order, particularly with respect to women in research. Notably, no significant differences in barriers were observed between community training programs and academic centers.
conclusionResearch experience and mentorship during EP fellowship were key determinants of subsequent research success after training, with similar findings by sex and race. These findings explain how fellowship training influences a physician's research practice after training and highlights opportunities to modify EP fellowships and to augment research retention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.