Skip to main content
Log in

What are Clinician Scientists Expected to do? The Undefined Space for Professionalizable Work in Translational Biomedicine

  • Published:
Minerva Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Clinician scientists have gained institutional support in the era of translational research, as the key solution to closing the ‘translational gap’ between biomedical research and medical practice. However, clinician scientists remain an ‘endangered species’ in search of a secure niche, while new grants and training programs attempt to counteract their measurable decline in numbers over the past decades. Our study asks how an occupational space for clinician scientists is currently situated between the politics of translation, professional dynamics, and the specialization of academic disciplines. We interviewed clinician scientists, their adjacent professions—clinicians and biomedical researchers—, and contrast their views with expectations from the discourse on clinician scientists in the biomedical and policy literature. We identify professionalizable work and tasks that relate to, first, being able to speak the two languages of both clinic and research, second, translating patients’ needs and clinical experience for further research, and third, counteracting the trends towards specialization by providing an inclusive point of view. We find that clinician scientists are overburdened with fulfilling a hybrid role of simultaneously being clinicians and scientists. Based on these findings, we suggest a path for the future professional development of clinician scientists towards the role of a translator.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, Andrew. 1988. The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, Andrew. 2005. Linked Ecologies: States and Universities as Environments for Professions. Sociological Theory 23(3): 245–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, Andrew. 2016. Processual Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blümel, Clemens, Stephan Gauch, Barbara Hendriks, Anne K. Krüger, and Martin Reinhart. 2015. In Search of Translational Research: Report on the Development and Current Understanding of a New Terminology in Medical Research and Practice. IFQ-BIH-Report. Berlin: Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance; Humboldt-University Berlin.

  • Bogusz, Tanja, and Martin Reinhart. 2018. Öffentliche Soziologie als Experimentalistische Kollaboration. In Öffentliche Gesellschaftswissenschaften, eds. Stefan Selke, and Annette Treibel, 345–359. Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan, Caragh. 2017. Alternative Futures: Fields, Boundaries, and Divergent Professionalisation Strategies Within the Chiropractic Profession. Social Science & Medicine 190: 83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, Declan. 2008. Translational Research: Crossing the Valley of Death. Nature 453: 840–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvert, Jane. 2010. Systems Biology, Interdisciplinarity and Disciplinary Identity. In Collaboration in the New Life Sciences, eds. John N. Parker, Niki Vermeulen, and Bart Penders, 201–218. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daye, Dania, Chirag B. Patel, Jaimo Ahn, and Freddy T. Nguyen. 2015. Challenges and Opportunities for Reinvigorating the Physician-Scientist Pipeline. The Journal of Clinical Investigation 125: 883–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DFG. 2015. Etablierung eines integrierten Forschungs- und Weiterbildungs- Programms für „Clinician Scientists“ parallel zur Facharztweiterbildung. Empfehlungen der Ständigen Senatskommission für Grundsatzfragen in der Klinischen Forschung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. Bonn: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

  • Fournier, Valérie. 2000. Boundary Work and the (Un)Making of the Professions. In Professionalism, Boundaries and the Workplace, ed. Nigel Malin, 67–86. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freidson, Eliot. 1988. Profession of Medicine: A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freidson, Eliot. 2004. Professionalism Reborn: Theory, Prophecy and Policy. Reprinted. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  • Fudge, N., E. Sadler, H.R. Fisher, J. Maher, C.D.A. Wolfe, and C. McKevitt. 2016. Optimising Translational Research Opportunities: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Basic and Clinician Scientists’ Perspectives of Factors Which Enable or Hinder Translational Research. PLoS One 11(8): e0160475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, James Paul. 2014. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidis, John P.A. 2004. Materializing Research Promises: Opportunities, Priorities and Conflicts in Translational Medicine. Journal of Translational Medicine 2: 5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ioannidis, John P.A., Daniele Fanelli, Debbie Drake Dunne, and Steven N. Goodman. 2015. Meta-Research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and Practices. PLoS Biology 13(10): e1002264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, Katherine C. 2014. Brokerage Professions and Implementing Reform in an Age of Experts. American Sociological Review 79(5): 912–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluijtmans, M., E. de Haan, S. Akkerman, and J. van Tartwijk. 2017. Professional Identity in Clinician-Scientists: Brokers Between Care and Science. Medical Education 51(6): 645–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, Daryl. 1994. The Ground of Professional Ethics. Professional Ethics. London: Routledge.

  • Kultgen, John H. 1988. Ethics and Professionalism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lander, Bryn, Gillian E. Hanley, and Janet Atkinson-Grosjean. 2010. Clinician-Scientists in Canada: Barriers to Career Entry and Progress. PLoS One 5(10): e13168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemoine, Nick R. 2008. The Clinician-Scientist: A Rare Breed Under Threat in a Hostile Environment. Disease Models & Mechanisms 1(1): 12–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ley, Timothy J., and Leon E. Rosenberg. 2002. Removing Career Obstacles for Young Physician-Scientists—Loan-Repayment Programs. New England Journal of Medicine 346(5): 368–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockyer, Jocelyn M., Paul L. Beck, Morley D. Hollenberg, Brenda R. Hemmelgarn, Jennifer Taber, Kenneth A. Harris, Lisa Gorman, and Michael Strong. 2014. 11. The Clinician Scientist in Canada: Supporting Innovations in Patient Care through Clinical Research. Ottawa: Royal College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macleod, M.R., et al. 2014. Biomedical Research: Increasing Value, Reducing Waste. The Lancet 383(9912): 101–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marincola, Francesco. 2003. Translational Medicine: A Two-Way Road. Journal of Translational Medicine 1(1): 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meltzer, S.J. 1909. The Science of Clinical Medicine: What It Ought to Be and the Men to Uphold It. Journal of the American Medical Association LIII 7: 508–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milewicz, Dianna M., Robin G. Lorenz, Terence S. Dermody, Lawrence F. Brass, and National Association of MD-PhD Programs Executive Committee. 2015. Rescuing the Physician-Scientist Workforce: The Time for Action is Now. Journal of Clinical Investigation 125(10): 3742–3747.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nancarrow, Susan A., and Alan M. Borthwick. 2005. Dynamic Professional Boundaries in the Healthcare Workforce. Sociology of Health & Illness 27(7): 897–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Scott F., Martin A. Fischhoff, Stacey A. Sakowski, and Eva L. Feldman. 2012. Perspective: Transforming Science into Medicine: How Clinician-Scientists Can Build Bridges Across Research’s ‘Valley of Death’. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 87(3): 266–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, Michael R. 2011. The Role of the Physician-Scientist in Our Evolving Society. Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal 2(4): e00063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Leon E. 1999. Physician-Scientists—Endangered and Essential. Science 283(5400): 331–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblum, Norman D., Manon Kluijtmans, and Olle ten Cate. 2016. Professional Identity Formation and the Clinician-Scientist: A Paradigm for a Clinical Career Combining Two Distinct Disciplines. Academic Medicine 91(12): 1612–1617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, Andrew I. 2009. The Vanishing Physician-Scientist? Cornell: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, William. 1993. Introduction to Q-Methodology. Operant Subjectivity 17(1/2): 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Kathryn M. 1992. Integrating Conflicting Professional Roles: Physician Participation in Randomized Clinical Trials. Social Science & Medicine 35(2): 217–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, Stefan. 2008. Professions and Their Work: Do Market Shelters Protect Professional Interests? Work and Occupations 35(2): 164–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vignola-Gagné, Etienne. 2014. Argumentative Practices in Science, Technology and Innovation Policy: The Case of Clinician-Scientists and Translational Research. Science and Public Policy 41(4): 94–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, S., and P. Stenner. 2012. Doing Q Methodological Research: Theory, Method and Interpretation, 1st ed. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westfall, John M., James Mold, and Lyle Fagnan. 2007. Practice-Based Research: ‘Blue Highways’ on the NIH Roadmap. Journal of American Medical Association 297(4): 403–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson-Kovacs, Dana M., and Christine Hauskeller. 2012. The Clinician-Scientist: Professional Dynamics in Clinical Stem Cell Research. Sociology of Health & Illness 34(4): 497–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wissenschaftsrat. 2016. Perspektiven der Universitätsmedizin, vol. 566, 3–16. Weimar: Wissenschaftsrat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xyrichis, Andreas, Karen Lowton, and Anne Marie Rafferty. 2017. Accomplishing Professional Jurisdiction in Intensive Care: An Ethnographic Study of Three Units. Social Science & Medicine 1982(181): 102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Faten Ahmed for her contributions to the study design and Ruth Sonnet for her assistance with the coding process and manual data input. We thank Anne K. Krüger, Stephan Gauch and Clemens Blümel as well as the Berlin Institute of Health (BIH) and the research group at QUEST Center for their constructive discussions. We also want to thank the participants and convenors of the sub-theme “Justifying the Organization: Dealing with Conflicting Economies of Worth and Legitimacy Struggles” at the European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS) in Copenhagen for their helpful advice. Last but not least, we want to thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara Hendriks.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 352 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hendriks, B., Simons, A. & Reinhart, M. What are Clinician Scientists Expected to do? The Undefined Space for Professionalizable Work in Translational Biomedicine. Minerva 57, 219–237 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-019-09367-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-019-09367-4

Keywords

Navigation