Skip to main content
RACS ASC 2026
A narrative review of mandatory research during specialty training: Opportunity for parallel frameworks
Verbal Presentation

Verbal Presentation

4:42 pm

02 May 2026

Meeting Room M9

Research Papers

Presentation Description

Institution: Christchurch Hospital - Christchurch, Aotearoa New Zealand

Background: Scholarship and teaching is integral to becoming a successful surgeon, indeed it is one of the ten core competencies identified by the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. Despite its importance, there is considerable variation in the way this competency is taught and assessed as part of general surgical training. Both countries primarily use the production of research as a metric to gauge mastery. Aims: This narrative review explores the experiences reported by institutions regarding mandatory research production as part of specialist training. Methods: A review of the literature was conducted using PubMed and Ovid search terms [research], [surg*], [requirement*], [residency] and [training] with Boolean modifiers to provide a comprehensive search. Relevant papers underwent qualitative review to identify themes and “common themes” were defined as those appearing in three or more publications Results: The search yielded 47 unique publications, of which 15 were relevant. Three common themes emerged: (a) Integration within training, (b) Infrastructure, support and mentorship, and (c) Outcomes of trainee research. Discussion: The reviewed papers generally expressed dissatisfaction with current frameworks. Integration could be facilitated by protected, dedicated research time but requires further funding to offset the reduction in clinical time. Infrastructure, support and mentorship is improved by university affiliation but creates discrepancies between urban and rural centres. Reduced quality of research output likely reflects the variability in competency assessment. The introduction of Entrustable Professional Activities in General Surgery Education and Training provides a new framework for teaching and assessing scholarship. Furthermore, it better integrates research within training and reallocates infrastructure and support to trainees undertaking more intensive and academically satisfying projects. Conclusion: Alternative frameworks for assessing scholarship mastery allows precious resources to be dedicated to higher quality research.
Presenters
Authors
Authors

Dr Nicholas Mcintosh - , Dr Simon Richards -