These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Scholarly activities among clinical laboratory science faculty.
    Author: Waller KV, Wyatt D, Karni KR.
    Journal: Clin Lab Sci; 1999; 12(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 10350896.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To describe the research and scholarly productivity of faculty in four-year college and university clinical laboratory science (CLS) programs. To identify meaningful scholarship, to assign values to that scholarship, and to list the top 15 CLS programs according to faculty research productivity. DESIGN: In 1996, a national study involving 127 college and university CLS programs was conducted to determine whether faculty were participating in research. A questionnaire was distributed to 505 faculty members. Data from 286 respondents (57% response) representing 114 of 127 (90%) CLS programs were analyzed. SETTING: The study took place at The Ohio State University with collaboration from the University of Tennessee-Memphis and the University of Minnesota. PARTICIPANTS: All CLS faculty within a four-year university or college sponsoring a CLS program were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To determine whether CLS faculty scholarly activities have been strengthened in the last decade, to quantitate scholarship productivity by point assessment, and to list the top 15 CLS programs according to faculty research productivity. RESULTS: Research productivity included time spent in research, numbers of publications and presentations, and grantsmanship. Data indicate that faculty who possess earned doctorates and are employed by research universities have higher levels of research productivity. While 46% of the CLS faculty hold doctorates and 50% are tenured, 42% of all CLS faculty members have not published a research paper or abstract since 1990. Conversely, faculty in some non-research institutions may not be expected to participate in such scholarly activities. On the other hand, 23% of the faculty responding had published six or more articles or abstracts since 1990, 46% were successful in obtaining external funding, and 15% of faculty members had been awarded grants larger than $100,000. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10% of clinical laboratory science faculty researchers are performing approximately one-half of all scholarly activities. The top fifteen research programs in CLS are identified, and not surprisingly, are located in research universities. In the past decade, and generally speaking, CLS faculty have made progress in scholarship including highest degree obtained, publications, presentations, and grantsmanship.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]