Integrating basic science in academic cardiology training: two international perspectives on a common challenge

4Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Political bodies and professional societies acknowledge that translational research benefits from researchers trained in both, clinical medicine and basic science. Yet, few physicians undergoing clinical training in cardiology seek this dual career (Milewicz et al. J Clin Invest 125:3742–3747, 2015). The reasons are likely manifold, but with cardiology having become increasingly interventional and facing economic pressure, how much attention, credit, and encouragement is given to physicians interested in basic cardiovascular science? Having studied and worked in hospitals and laboratories, in both Germany and the USA, we aim to compare in this article how basic science education is currently integrated into cardiology training at German and US university hospitals, from medical school to more advanced career stages. By doing so, we hope to provide some outside perspectives to young physicians and decision makers alike, that may inspire changes to curricula in the respective countries and around the world.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bode, M. F., & Hilgendorf, I. (2019). Integrating basic science in academic cardiology training: two international perspectives on a common challenge. Clinical Research in Cardiology, 108(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-018-1294-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free