|
   |
|
ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
|
|
| Year : 2019 | Volume
: 35
| Issue : 2 | Page : 119-120 |
| |
Editorial comment
Apul Goel
Professor of Urology, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
| Date of Web Publication | 1-Apr-2019 |
Correspondence Address:
Apul Goel
Professor of Urology, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/iju.IJU_375_18
How to cite this article:
Goel A. Editorial comment. Indian J Urol 2019;35:119-20 |
The authors need to be congratulated for evaluating the understanding of evidence-based medicine (EBM) among urology residents and providing data in the field of urological education. Although vital, data on urological education and residency in India are scarce.
With 239 MCh and 90 DNB seats annually, the quality of urological education in India is heterogeneous. Furthermore, the research publication output from various Indian urology training centers is likely to be disparate.[1] The reasons could be many, including differences in mentors, availability of resources, type of center (whether academic or corporate or private), or other ill-defined reasons.
The authors report that only 11% of the respondents had received any formal training in EBM. These data are not unexpected. In India, formal and dedicated training in EBM is limited to very few centers. However, in the past few years, there has been a welcome change. With increasing emphasis on publications,[2] awareness about the need to learn research methodology and practice EBM is increasing globally.[3],[4],[5] Today, the opportunities to learn have increased, including dedicated workshops and sessions in conferences.
What was surprising was the fact that only 47% of the participants claimed that they had access to PubMed® at work. These data seem unbelievable. A mandatory requirement for any center to run a urology training program in India is to have access to a certain number of journals. In addition, many journals, including the Indian Journal of Urology, are open access. With the increasing number of open access journals and articles, limited access to literature is no more an excuse. Moreover, many pharmaceutical companies today provide medical literature on request.
The onus of knowing EBM rests both with the trainees and their trainers. Faculty members need to routinely discuss newer evidence and literature in day-to-day practice to make EBM relevant. It appears that access to literature is limited in many training centers and an effort should be made to subscribe to at least the important resources.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
 References | |  |
| 1. | Ray S, Shah I, Nundy S. The research output from Indian medical institutions between 2005 and 2014. Curr Med Res Pract 2016;6:49-58.  |
| 2. | Aggarwal R, Gogtay N, Kumar R, Sahni P; Indian Association of Medical Journal Editors. The revised guidelines of the medical council of India for academic promotions: Need for a rethink. Indian J Urol 2016;32:1-4. [ PUBMED] [Full text] |
| 3. | Hajebrahimi S, Sadeghi-Ghyassi F, Olfati N, Dastgiri S, Maghbouli L. Evidence based practice: Perspectives of Iranian urologists. Urol J 2014;10:1099-105. |
| 4. | Roth K, Siemens DR. The status of evidence-based medicine education in urology residency. Can Urol Assoc J 2010;4:114-20. |
| 5. | Friad G, Sabah K, Ameen IH. Urology training in the developing world: The trainees' perspective in Kurdistan, Iraq. Arab J Urol 2014;12:6-11. |
|
