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 2005;331:694 (24 September), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7518.694
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORFour factors are responsible for the failure of academic medicine. The first is the research assessment exercise, which, surprisingly, is not discussed in the ICRAM scenarios outlined by Clark for the International Campaign to Revitalise Academic Medicine.1 The second is the inhibition of clinical research by the draconian regulations often inflicted by ethics committees. The third is the formidable problems faced by people wishing to work with animals. The last is the conflict of working for two mastersthe universities and the NHS.
The scenarios have taken little account of previously successful models of clinical academic departments, which made important contributions in advancing medical science and promoting high educational standards. The research assessment exercise is inappropriate for craft specialties because it demeans staff with teaching and surgical skills, concentrating on research drawing in large funding.2
Although scenario 4 draws attention to the issues of global academic partnerships, ICRAM failed
E Malcolm Symonds, emeritus professor
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, School of Human Development and Midwifery, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH Profems@aol.com
Sir Peter Bell, emeritus professor
Department of Surgery, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester LE1 5WW
Jangu Banatvala, emeritus professor
Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, London SE1 8WA