Related Experiment Videos
Scholarly activities among clinical laboratory science faculty
K V Waller1, D Wyatt, K R Karni
1Ohio State University, Columbus 43210, USA. waller.1@osu.edu
Summary
Clinical Laboratory Science (CLS) faculty research productivity varies, with top researchers contributing significantly. Progress in scholarship is evident over the past decade, particularly in research universities.
Area of Science:
- Medical Education
- Biomedical Sciences
- Clinical Laboratory Science
Background:
- Faculty scholarly activity is crucial for academic advancement and program reputation in Clinical Laboratory Science (CLS).
- Understanding research productivity trends helps identify areas for growth and support within CLS programs.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the current research and scholarly output of faculty in four-year college and university CLS programs.
- To identify and rank the top CLS programs based on faculty research productivity.
- To evaluate progress in CLS faculty scholarship over the preceding decade.
Main Methods:
- A national survey in 1996 collected data from 286 CLS faculty across 114 institutions.
- Faculty participants were from four-year colleges and universities with CLS programs.
- Productivity was measured by time in research, publications, presentations, and grantsmanship.
Main Results:
- Faculty with doctorates at research universities showed higher research productivity.
- 42% of CLS faculty had not published since 1990, while 23% published six or more articles/abstracts.
- 46% secured external funding, and 15% received grants exceeding $100,000.
Conclusions:
- A small percentage of CLS faculty researchers (top 10%) account for a large portion of scholarly output.
- The top 15 CLS research programs are predominantly located in research-intensive universities.
- CLS faculty scholarship, including degrees, publications, and grants, has generally advanced over the past decade.