Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;328:46 (3 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7430.46-b
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORClark and Smith announce a crisis in academic medicine and call for an international campaign to re-establish its credentials.1 This assertive policy marks a turning point for a discipline that has to date adopted a defensive posture in the developing healthcare environment.2
Unlike healthcare research, where the impact on service delivery has been minimal, research in academic medicine has delivered many important innovations. But, unfortunately, academic research still reflects a store in which researchers are busy filling shelves with a comprehensive set of all possible relevant studies that a decision maker might some day drop by to purchase.3 The endeavour is characterised by a voluminous literature, invariably driven by the dictates of funding spirals and accreditation exercises and, in many cases, irrelevant to the efficient production of health against a background of limited public resources.
|
|
Credit: ST BARTHOLOMEW'S/SPL
|
This retail perspective on research overlooks two important economic insights.
David P Kernick, general practitioner
St Thomas Medical Group, St Thomas Health Centre, Exeter EX4 1HJ su1838@eclipse.co.uk