IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0358770.html

Comparison of research outputs and clinical competence between orthopedic surgeons from two training pathways: A single-center study at a Chinese tertiary general hospital

Author

Listed:
  • Zhijian Li
  • Lan Wang

Abstract

Background: In China, there are two primary models for medical doctorate training. This study seeks to conduct a comparative analysis of the research outputs and clinical competence for orthopedic doctoral surgeons under these two models, aiming to provide a reference for the further optimization of training programs. Methods: Basic information, research output, and clinical performance data were systematically collected from orthopedic surgeons employed at the National Center for Orthopedics of a public tertiary hospital from January 2013 to December 2022. Inter-group comparisons were conducted using the Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test. Binary logistic regression analysis was additionally adopted to quantify the magnitude of the association between medical training background and research outputs. Results: The median ages of orthopedic surgeons from the eight-year program and traditional medical education backgrounds were 31.0 years and 34.5 years, respectively (p

Suggested Citation

  • Zhijian Li & Lan Wang, 2026. "Comparison of research outputs and clinical competence between orthopedic surgeons from two training pathways: A single-center study at a Chinese tertiary general hospital," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(9), pages 1-9, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358770
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0358770
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358770
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0358770&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0358770?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0358770. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.