KIMS's new rules?

So word's been going around that KIMS are changing the scholarship rules for people who would like to specialize abroad. To be honest, I'm not well versed on the issue but what I can gather from people (which may not be entirely accurate so don't quote us!):

-High GPA
-High TOEFL score
-You need to get into the Kuwaiti board and pass their exam
-You don't get to choose which country you go to
-You don't get to choose which specialty you get into

I guess what's more frustrating than having new rules is not having a system in place where these regulations are spelt out (on KIMS's website or another regulatory body). Things are a bit murky for junior doctors at the moment with little guidance from administrators to help them plan their future.

Anyway, for interested parties, apparently there's going to be a meeting at Kuwait Medical Association's HQ at 8pm today, Kuwait time.

More information is available if you join this facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=118389084868775#!/group.php?gid=118389084868775&v=wall

Let us know if you are in possession of any more information!

Nature Book Reviews: The Vanishing Physician Scientists?

The USA is the birthplace of many prominent physician-scientists and even there, it appears that the numbers of practicing physician-scientists are dwindling. This book, reviewed by the journal Nature, offers possible explanations for the drop in physicians who practice science.

The academic niche for physician-scientists has been degenerating for over three decades. In 1979, the director of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), James Wyngaarden, initially highlighted an alarming drop-off in the number of physician-scientists and their success rates in NIH funding. Since then, the combined burdens of an increasingly stringent overall NIH budget, educational loans on young physicians (often in the six figures), the procedure-driven nature of modern clinical medicine, and the financial vise of managed care and its follow-on effects on the academic environment have created an increasingly ablative force on the necessary environment to maintain a proper balance in the numbers of physician-scientists. In The Vanishing Physician-Scientist?, edited by Andrew I. Schafer, currently chairman of the Department of Medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College, the fate of the physician-scientist is revisited from multiple angles: renewal versus extinction, the evolution of diverse lineages (MD-PhD, late bloomers with MD degrees alone, PhDs in clinical departments), implications for biotechnology and drug discovery, gender imbalance, pipeline versus attrition effects, role models, financial and modern lifestyle concerns and the fragile microenvironmental niche of academic medicine in general. The result is a fascinating must-read for those of us with a deep interest in the subject that goes beyond conjecture and anecdotal personal experience to recent academic survey data, population analyses, current NIH funding trends, outcome analyses of MD-PhD trainees and, most importantly, onward toward a series of cogent, specific and implementable suggestions for regeneration. As the last page is turned, a more sanguine view of the problem emerges, along with a few surprises.

The book is comprised of 15 chapters written by over twenty leading physician-scientists who offer a number of penetrating insights into the crux of the problem of regenerating a new cadre of leaders in academic medicine. For example, as noted in the book by Tim Ley, a former president of the American Society of Clinical Investigation, the demographics of physician-scientists have been relatively stable since 1990. The bulk of these researchers hold an MD degree alone, and their success rates for NIH funding are similar to others with PhD or MD-PhD joint degrees. A surprising trend of combined MD-PhD trainees moving away from scientific careers is also evident in survey analyses. Interestingly, a case can be made to enhance our focus on designing strategies for renewing the population of physician-scientists. Also, as noted by Ley, the pool of physician-scientists is still overwhelmingly male, despite the near equal number of females in medical school today, indicating a need to address gender-specific issues.

'Translational medicine' has become the mantra for every medical school dean in the US and elsewhere, and, as presented by Barry Coller, the physician-in-chief of Rockefeller University, in his chapter, regenerating the pool of physician-scientists is clearly central to this goal. Increasingly, scientific centers of excellence are forging close networks with leading medical institutions, creating an interactive, nurturing microenvironment for physician-scientists. In this new era, in which humans themselves are models for human disease, technological barriers are rapidly breaking down, as higher-throughput human genotyping, whole exome or genome sequencing and high-content chemical screening on human stem cell model systems are becoming customary. The major discoveries in genomics research coming out of the Broad Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in close collaboration with physicians at Massachusetts General Hospital and elsewhere, come to mind. Finding the extreme and rare clinical phenotypes of major interest, and having the capability of calling back the patient for additional information, will be increasingly important going forward. However, as Coller clearly documents, academia must recalibrate how young physicians are recognized, protected and promoted as essential components of these large interdisciplinary teams.

The crucial role of the environmental academic niche for physician-scientists, and the need for its substantial modification, is a major point of discussion in many chapters. In terms of mentoring, the needs for earlier exposure to research in the core medical curriculum, as well as in post-graduate MD training, the inclusion of off-site mentors and exposure to successful physician-scientists that have managed to balance the scientific and medical demands of their profession with personal family goals are mentioned throughout the book. The need for the institution itself to create a more nurturing infrastructure is also highlighted.

Finally, as noted by the preeminent physician-scientist David Nathan, the former president of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and also the physician-in-chief of Children's Hospital in Boston, there has never been a more exciting time to be a physician-scientist. “They must not and will not vanish,” he writes. “Indeed, their future can be as bright as ever if we proactively fashion it with creativity, foresight, and vision.” This future is clearly being empowered by annotated digital medical records, expanding databases on genotype-phenotype disease correlations from global collaborations, and research centers and networks funded by major philanthropic organizations and individuals. Likewise, the ability to study human disease in a dish, offered by recent advances in human stem cell biology, are extraordinary, offering the possibility of studying extremely rare and highly differentiated human cells from people with specific, rare and/or common diseases. Clearly, a resurgence in human physiology is on the horizon, and this need alone is likely to lead to a new breed of physician-scientists. The future of biology might be summed up in three words: human, human and human. Stethoscope, anyone?

You can buy this book from Amazon here.

Johns Hopkins Comes to Kuwait!

This is very interesting. I posted a rant 10 days or so ago complaining how everyone in the Gulf except Kuwait is collaborating with world class hospitals. Someone must be reading our blog at the Ministry because yesterday, an article from KUNA stated that an agreement is being set up with Johns Hopkins to manage 4 Kuwaiti Hospitals (I'm joking, I don't really think anyone at the Ministry of Health is following our blog). This is fantastic! I love optimistic news. Read the article below:

Article from KUNA: -- Kuwaiti Health Minister Dr. Hilal Al-Sayer said Thursday that cooperation agreements have been set with John Hopkins University and Hospital, to manage Al-Farwaniya, Amiri, Addan and Jahra Hospitals in Kuwait.
Al-Sayer told Kuwait News Agency KUNA, that talks with John Hopkins officials included ways to provide technical support services, information systems, laboratories, radiology, and quality of services, in addition to reviewing work policies in technical divisions like emergency, anesthesia and surgery.
He added, discussions also included ways to develop the health sector in the four hospitals, in the fields of therapeutic, diagnostic and training, in addition to sending doctors from Kuwait for training and fellowship in subspecialties.
Al-Sayer said, officials at Johns Hopkins University aim to promote healthy relations with Kuwait, and is ready to provide all possible facilities and better health services.
The Minister of Health had signed a memo of understanding in Canada for the development of services to treat cancer diseases and surgery, in addition to cardiovascular research, education with the largest Canadian health centers and universities in Toronto and Montreal. (end) mah.st.asa KUNA 281344 Jan 10NNNN

Click here to read more

Qatar=Cornell, UAE=Harvard, Saudi=Hopkins, Bahrain=RCSI, Kuwait=Nothing

As I was browsing through medical news today, the headline 'Leading Ophthalmological Centres In The United States and Saudi Arabia Announce Affiliation' caught my eye. Apparently, the Wilmer Eye Institue of John Hopkins (which has held the top spot in USNews' annual hospital ranking since 1990) will be collaborating with King Khaled Specialist Eye Hospital in Riyadh in the following areas: patient care, education and research. Click here to read article

How come every country in the Gulf, except Kuwait, is setting up international medical collaborations? Qatar has an Ivy League medical school, Dubai has Harvard Research Foundation, plus Tawam Hospital has a John Hopkins affiliation and even Bahrain has the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. We got zip!

The opportunities such collaborations would open up for patients and doctors are invaluable. Does anyone know why we are so behind?