Impact of PMDC Stance on Clinicians’ Pursuit of Book Writing

Academic and book writing are avenues for sharing knowledge, sparking curiosity, and contributing to the intellectual discourse. Both forms of writing require discipline, dedication, and a passion for the subject matter, making them powerful tools for both personal expression and the advancement of collective understanding. Individuals who enjoy writing are creative, reflective, and motivated by a desire to express themselves or make a meaningful contribution to the world through their writing. They are either subject matter experts or professors in their respective fields.

In Pakistan, professors in subjects of Humanities, law and management sciences are often more inclined to author books compared to those in medical sciences. This difference can be attributed to the fact that non-medical professors generally hold PhD degrees, while professors in clinical disciplines usually do not. Instead, they either possess Fellowships or MD, MS, or MDS. These postgraduate degrees are clinically focused and emphasize patient care and clinical practice. In contrast, in western countries, professors and senior faculty members in dental and medical colleges actively contribute to academic literature by writing textbooks and reference materials, thereby enhancing educational resources for students and professionals. However, this practice is less common in Pakistan, and several factors contribute to this discrepancy.

One of the key reasons for this is the stance of the Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PMDC) on PhD degrees in clinical sciences. ?While Higher Education Commission (HEC) accepts PhD as a terminal qualification, PMDC, the regulatory authority for medical and dental education in the country, does not register PhD degrees or other research-based degrees in clinical sciences. Recognition by regulatory bodies can be a significant motivating factor for professionals to engage in academic research and writing. The absence of such recognition by the PMDC means that the effort and resources invested in obtaining a PhD may not translate into tangible benefits for clinicians, reducing their motivation to contribute to academic literature or writing books.

Dental and medical professionals often pursue additional education and degrees to advance their careers, secure promotions, and enhance their professional standing. However, due to PMDC regulations, they tend to choose academic programs other than PhD degrees. Consequently, the pursuit of academic writing, an integral component of PhD programs, is discouraged. Moreover, recognition of academic qualifications by regulatory bodies helps establish their value within the professional community. Without PMDC endorsement, a PhD in clinical sciences may be perceived as less valuable, further discouraging doctors from pursuing such degrees and engaging in related academic activities.

Another reason doctors may not pursue PhD programs is the highly limited availability of such research-based programs within the country. While PhDs in basic medical / dental sciences are available, most doctors prefer to specialize in clinical sciences. If the PMDC revises its stance and permits universities to offer PhDs in clinical sciences, young doctors inclined towards achieving higher education would be inclined to join these research-based degree programs.

In most Middle Eastern countries, doctors with PhDs are highly regarded for senior teaching positions. Indian and Egyptian professionals with PhDs in clinical medical sciences often secure these roles more easily than their Pakistani counterparts. This disparity negatively impacts the ability of Pakistani medical professionals to generate foreign exchange for the country.

The capacity to write books and contribute to academic literature differs greatly between clinicians with PhDs and those with fellowships or other clinical qualifications. This variation stems from the distinct training, focus, and skill sets developed during PhD programs compared to fellowships or clinical degrees. Recognizing these differences sheds light on why clinicians with PhDs may be more proficient in writing books than their peers who pursue clinical programs.

PhD programs are fundamentally research-oriented, emphasizing the development of original research, critical thinking, and analytical skills. The trainees undergo rigorous training in research methodologies, data analysis, and scientific writing. They are required to produce a dissertation/thesis which involves extensive literature reviews, hypothesis formulation, experimental design, and data interpretation. Throughout their PhD training tenure, trainees frequently write research papers, review articles and grant proposals. This constant engagement with academic writing refines their ability to articulate complex ideas clearly and persuasively. PhD programs include coursework and workshops focused on scientific communication, enhancing candidates' skills in writing for various audiences, including academic peers, policymakers, and the general public. The PhD programs require candidates to publish their research in peer-reviewed journals before they can be awarded PhD degree. This process familiarizes them with the standards of scholarly publishing, peer review, and the dissemination of research findings. The experience of navigating the publication process equips PhD holders with the skills needed to write and publish books, as they are accustomed to the rigor and scrutiny of academic publishing.

On the contrary, fellowships and other clinical program are specialized training programs designed to provide advanced clinical expertise in a specific area of dentistry or medicine. The primary focus, of these training programs, is on patient care, procedural skills, and clinical decision-making. The enrolled clinical trainees spend most of their time in clinical settings, gaining hands-on experience with complex clinical cases and advanced treatment techniques. Though some fellowships include research components, the emphasis is typically on clinical practice rather than academic research. They do participate in clinical studies or quality improvement projects, but these activities are generally secondary to their clinical duties. The writing that clinicians do is mostly limited to clinical case reports, patient notes, and procedural documentation, which differ significantly from the academic writing required for book authorship.

Since its inception, Pakistan has consistently followed the health education system of UK and in the UK, teaching assignments in medical and dental education are reserved for individuals who hold a PhD in medical sciences rather than those with Fellowships from the Royal Colleges. This approach reflects the emphasis on research and academic expertise that PhD holders bring to medical education. No doubt, Fellows of the Royal Colleges are highly skilled in clinical practice and patient care, PhD holders possess a deep understanding of research methodologies, scientific inquiry, and the theoretical foundations of medical science. Consequently, PhD-trained professionals are often better equipped to contribute to academic literature, curriculum development, and the advancement of medical knowledge, making them the preferred choice for teaching roles in universities and academic institutions across the UK.

PMDC stance on PhD degrees in clinical sciences plays a critical role in shaping the academic pursuit of clinical doctors in Pakistan. To foster a culture of scholarly contribution and continuous learning, it is essential for regulatory bodies to recognize and value PhD as advanced academic qualifications, thereby encouraging medical professionals to engage in research, writing, and the sharing of knowledge through books and other publications.

Published in SunriseToday Sept. 2024.