Usage Information
Abstract
Physician-scientists represent one of the most impactful, yet underrecognized, innovations of 20th century academic medicine. Defined by a commitment to full-time careers in investigative work, physician-scientists have repeatedly demonstrated a unique ability to identify and solve problems of unmet medical need in a focused and intentional manner using their dual training in clinical medicine and the scientific method as both stethoscope and scalpel. Unfortunately, while the value of physician-scientists has never been greater, the institutional infrastructure to support them has never been explicitly defined (1), a deficiency now amplified by mounting financial pressures from both clinical revenue models and an increasingly constrained research funding landscape (2, 3). This white paper reports the output of a consortium of academic medical centers, foundations, and professional societies seeking to remedy this deficiency. This consortium specifically developed a framework to formalize the career path of physician-scientist faculty into a professionally unified and financially sustainable structure amenable to adoption across US academic medical centers and health systems. Key components of this framework included an administratively operational definition of physician-scientists, and 3 central and interconnected pillars (academic, financial, and organizational) that are rooted in this foundational definition. Herein, we detail core concepts and concrete recommendations.
Authors
Christopher S. Williams, Megan Allen, Paige Cooper-Byas, John Hawley, Louis J. Muglia, E. Dale Abel, Julie A. Bastarache, Carolyn Calfee, John M. Carethers, David N. Cornfield, Oliver Eickelberg, Emily J. Gallagher, Anna Greka, Peter J. Gruber, Anthony N. Hollenberg, Heidi H. Kong, Barbara Kazmierczak, Gary A. Koretzky, Mark Lachs, Deborah J. Lenschow, Geoffrey Pitt, Don C. Rockey, Lisa M. Satlin, Barry P. Sleckman, David A. Stoltz, Jatin M. Vyas, Thomas J. Wang, Kyu Y. Rhee
Usage data is cumulative from April 2026 through July 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 2,207 | 0 |
| 1,650 | 0 | |
| Figure | 126 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 303 | 0 |
| Totals | 4,286 | 0 |
| Total Views | 4,286 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
