Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Abstract I have been given the almost impossible task of assessing the status of research in otolaryngology residency programs across the country. How best to do this is elusive to me. However, three methods seem appropriate for the task. The first is to sample the philosophical opinions of program directors representing widely varied sized and geographically situated programs. The second is to review the pertinent results of the Society of University Ophthalmologists (SUO) survey, performed in 1981, regarding research and residency programs. The third is the presentation of an example of a program with a mandatory research rotation, specifically, that of the University of Washington, Seattle. Prior to composing this article, I thought it best to sample the opinions of directors of representative otolaryngology training programs. What follows are excerpts from letters composed by seven program directors in response to the question, What roles do researchers play in their training programs
Archives of Otolaryngology – American Medical Association
Published: Oct 1, 1982
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.