The hybrid of basic science and clinical training for the urologic oncologist: Necessity or waste?
OBJECTIVE
To examine the necessity and adequacy of basic science training for urologic oncology training programs.


METHODS
Evaluated whether urology physician scientists are adequately trained in the basic sciences.


RESULTS
The current urologic oncology training system does not adequately train physician scientists. We propose a major reform to define, train, and maintain the urology physician scientists.


CONCLUSIONS
Urology physician scientists have played a major role in advancement of urologic oncology. Major reform is necessary, if we wish to continue to successfully train urologic oncology physician scientists.
Olumi
Aria F
AF
Department of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA. aolumi@partnters.org
Dewolf
William C
WC
D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000193:education* / Q000379:methods; D004503:Education, Medical, Graduate; D005257:Fellowships and Scholarships; D006801:Humans; D007396:Internship and Residency; D008495:Medical Oncology / Q000193:education* / Q000379:methods; D008611:Mentors; D016730:Program Development; D014572:Urology / Q000193:education* / Q000379:methods