Protected Resident Research Time Does Not Increase the Quantity or Quality of Residency Program Research Publications: A Comparison of 3 Orthopedic Residencies.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of dedicated resident research time in terms of residency program research productivity remains largely unknown. We hypothesize that the quantity and quality of a residency program's peer-reviewed publications (PRPs) increase proportionately with the amount of dedicated research time given to residents.

METHODS: Three residency programs (P1, P2, and P3) were examined. P1 has a mandatory research year for all residents between postgraduate years 3 and 4. P2 has an elective research year for 1 resident between postgraduate years 2 and 3. P3 has no dedicated research time for residents. All publications produced by residents and staff at each program from January 2007 through December were recorded from PUBMED. SCImago Journal Rankings were used as a proxy to measure research quality.

RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the number of publications produced between the institutions on a per-staff (p = 0.27) and per-resident (p = 0.80) basis. There were no residents at P3 who graduated without at least 1 PRP, whereas there were 7 residents from P1 and 8 residents from P2 who graduated without a PRP. There were no significant differences between programs in terms of the SCImago Journal Ranking for the journals containing their publications (p = 0.135).

DISCUSSION: Residency programs with dedicated research time did not produce significantly (p > 0.05) more, or higher quality, PRPs than residencies without dedicated research time. It may be that the quantity and quality of PRPs is related more to faculty engagement, research interest, and mentorship at individual programs rather than the number of residents given dedicated time to complete research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.