目的 调查住院医师临床研究论文撰写现状及培训需求,为制定住院医师临床研究培训方案提供参考。方法 2022年4月,选取2019年至2021年在华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院参加住院医师规范化培训的住院医师为研究对象,采用问卷调查方法分析其临床研究论文撰写现状及培训需求。采用描述性统计分析相关数据。 结果 发放问卷181份并全部有效收回, 其中106人(58.6%)有工作经历;32人(17.7%)发表过或协助他人发表过临床论文;发现临床研究问题时,140人(77.3%)请教上级医师,106人(58.6%)使用通用搜索引擎,56人(30.9%)使用PubMed等专业医学搜索引擎,51人(28.2%)去图书馆,55人(30.4%)仅有过发表临床论文的想法;110人(60.8%)认为论文的每个部分都很困难;但是也有81人(44.8%)希望能完成全部的论文书写工作。89人(49.2%)能区别回顾性研究和前瞻性研究;141人(77.9%)会用软件插入参考文献。仅有25人(13.8%)得到过论文培训或讲解,但有160人(88.4%)有临床论文培训的需求,在培训形式选择上有在线上课[130(71.8%)],一对一小班辅导[102人(56.4%)];线下交流[83人(45.9%)],自学为主、邮件或微信提问[28人(15.5%)]等。结论 住院医师对临床研究论文的整体知识结构、方法学、统计学等存在严重不足,但在主观上有培训的需求和积极的态度,目前临床指导医师没有给予足够的重视和时间投入进行培训辅导。对此,培训基地和指导医师应当增加临床研究的培训比重并探索行之有效的培训方案。

Objective To investigate the current situation of clinical research paper writing and training needs of residents, and to provide reference for the development of clinical research training programs for residents. Methods Residents participating in the standardized training of residents at Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, from 2019 to 2021 were selected as the study subjects, and the questionnaire survey method was used to analyze the current situation of clinical research paper writing and training needs in April 2022. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the relevant data. Results A total of 181 questionnaires were sent out and all of them were effectively returned, of which 106 (58.6%) had working experience; 32 (17.7%) had published or assisted others to publish clinical papers; 140 (77.3%) consulted their supervisors when they found clinical research problems; 106 (58.6%) used general search engines; 56 (30.9%) used Pubmed and other professional medical search engines; 51 (28.2%) went to the library, and 55 (30.4%) had only ever thought of publishing a clinical paper. A total of 110(60.8%) found each part of the paper difficult; however, 81(44.8%) also wished they could have done all the writing of the paper. 89(49.2%) could distinguish between retrospective and prospective studies; 141(77.9%) would use software to insert references. Only 25(13.8%) had received thesis training or lectures, but 160(88.4%) had a need for clinical thesis training in terms of specific training methods such as online lectures [130(71.8%)], one-on-one small-group tutorials [102(56.4%)], offline exchanges [83(45.9%)], self-study mainly with email or WeChat questions [28(15.5%)]. Conclusions Residents have severe deficiencies in the overall knowledge structure, methodology, and statistics of clinical dissertations, but subjectively there is a need for training and a positive attitude, and currently the clinical supervising physicians do not give enough attention and time to invest in training and counseling. In this regard, training centers and supervising physicians should increase the proportion of clinical research training and explore effective training programs.