“Publications” – Are they an Adequate Yardstick for Evaluating a Medical Teacher?

“Publish or Perish”- this motto seems to be driving medical academicians crazy! Medical Science being a rapidly evolving field, there is no doubt that scientific literature needs to be updated for disseminating knowledge among physicians, for introducing new evidence for adoption by policy makers and for promoting legislation for public use. Also, research begets research, with secondary outcomes of one research generating hypothesis for next research. The impact and relevance of medical literature is such that even reports of single individual patients can create awareness regarding rare clinical presentations and associations, and provide guidance to physicians. Thus, “medical writing” is in a way the “life” of medical science. Hence comes the need for doctors to write and publish, so much so, that publications have now been essentially linked to career upgradation for the so-called “academic doctors” or Faculty of medical colleges across the country, probably in line with the international pattern. While taken in the ideal sense, the principle behind such mandatory requirements for a Faculty is flawless, however, the feasibility of achieving this target across all medical teaching institutions across the country is questionable. On the one hand, the overwhelming deluge of patients in most of the medical colleges of the public sector leaves hardly any protected time for moral conduct of a medical research in such institutes. On the other hand, the overbearing commercial demands and restrictions in many of the private sector institutions, hinders the possibility of a true and meaningful research. It is obvious that, in the face of the inherent obstacles of such systems, a pressure of publication for academic upgradation results in chasing the target of hitting the medical Press in stipulated time, and thereby inevitably breaches the fabric of integrity in research- an unquestionable element for the credence of research. Though, notwithstanding the adverse circumstances, many true, powerful and internationally recognized research have emanated from teaching institutions of this country, but the probability and conduciveness for such generation is far from similar across institutions of the country. What is however, more likely to be comparable and achievable by all medical teaching Faculty is being academically updated with clinical and teaching proficiency, which if required, may be assessed by periodic evaluation techniques. It is perhaps time to ponder on the question whether scientific publications are an adequate yardstick to reflect the academic competence of a medical teacher? Who can deny the astute clinical sense and passionate teaching of our senior veteran teachers of yester years, even without flaunting stamps of publications on their bosom? If meaningful research is desired for the progress of Science, then let research be a choice for those with passion, rather than being a compulsion for academic career sustenance of every medical teacher. While in the former strategy, research is likely to be done with rigor, spread over an optimal time till the answer to a practically relevant question is obtained, the latter strategy is prone to be a result of a hurried work, done for namesake.