untapped vs saturated research

[Dr34566]

How would you rank the following fields in terms of opportunities for research?
I.e., Which field has yet to embrace evidence-based medicine? Which field has emerging novel and untested methods and treatments? Which field hasn't changed (relatively) in the past 30 years and will continue to stay the same? Which field already has a ton of researchers vs. which doesn't?


Urology
Radiology
Radiation Oncology
Anesthesiology
Opthalmology
Pathology

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mtlove]

How would you rank the following fields in terms of opportunities for research?
I.e., Which field has yet to embrace evidence-based medicine? Which field has emerging novel and untested methods and treatments? Which field hasn't changed (relatively) in the past 30 years and will continue to stay the same? Which field already has a ton of researchers vs. which doesn't?


Urology
Radiology
Radiation Oncology
Anesthesiology
Opthalmology
Pathology

I work next to a lab that studies the genetics of anesthesia sensitivity, and I considered joining it at one time. There are very few people in this field (less than a handful of labs), and very little is currently known. This research is not well excepted by anesthesiologists according to the PI. Over the past few years, a few genes involved in humans and in other animals have been found.

 

[Circumflex]

How would you rank the following fields in terms of opportunities for research?
I.e., Which field has yet to embrace evidence-based medicine? Which field has emerging novel and untested methods and treatments? Which field hasn't changed (relatively) in the past 30 years and will continue to stay the same? Which field already has a ton of researchers vs. which doesn't?


Urology
Radiology
Radiation Oncology
Anesthesiology
Opthalmology
Pathology

The questions that you are asking require broad generalizations. It's like asking "What's the best specialty?" All fields embrace evidence-based medicine. All of the fields have changed significantly in the past 30 years. In each specialty, there are old techniques still used (chest X-rays, light microscopy, prostatectomies, etc.) and each field has new, exciting technology (functional MRI, genome-based diagnostics, robotic surgery).

Which field has more researchers depends on your idea of research. Clinicians do mainly clinical research. Pathology probably has more basic science researchers than the others because it's nature as a specialty (lab-based).

If you are creative, you can do novel, exciting research in any field. You have to ask what are obstacles to patient care, diagnosis, treatment in a particular field, then find new ways to find the answers. There is no shortage of questions.

 

[Dr34566]

The questions that you are asking require broad generalizations. It's like asking "What's the best specialty?" All fields embrace evidence-based medicine. All of the fields have changed significantly in the past 30 years. In each specialty, there are old techniques still used (chest X-rays, light microscopy, prostatectomies, etc.) and each field has new, exciting technology (functional MRI, genome-based diagnostics, robotic surgery).

Which field has more researchers depends on your idea of research. Clinicians do mainly clinical research. Pathology probably has more basic science researchers than the others because it's nature as a specialty (lab-based).

If you are creative, you can do novel, exciting research in any field. You have to ask what are obstacles to patient care, diagnosis, treatment in a particular field, then find new ways to find the answers. There is no shortage of questions.

Appreciate the reply but I think it's a cop-out. If you think my question is too broad in scope, feel free partition it into smaller questions or to impose some of your criteria. I agree that you can do novel research in any field, but certainly some fields are more researched than others, or have changed more than others, or have made more technological advancements than others, etc. Some fields have more open research just by being newer fields. Some fields are classic research fields, whereas others are relatively new to the game.
Obviously it's still a very hard question to generalize an answer for.

 

[Circumflex]

Appreciate the reply but I think it's a cop-out. If you think my question is too broad in scope, feel free partition it into smaller questions or to impose some of your criteria. I agree that you can do novel research in any field, but certainly some fields are more researched than others, or have changed more than others, or have made more technological advancements than others, etc. Some fields have more open research just by being newer fields. Some fields are classic research fields, whereas others are relatively new to the game.
Obviously it's still a very hard question to generalize an answer for.

It's not a cop-out - you asked questions for which the answers are very subjective, and to which there are no useful answers. Maybe, if you explain why you are asking, I or someone else might be able to provide a meaningful answer.

Tissue engineering is a cool new area that could be part of urology (tissue engineered kidneys and bladders) or ophthalmology (retina). I would say that anesthesia is the least research-oriented specialty unless you count the pharmacology basic science. And, pathology is probably the most saturated with researchers due to the nature of the specialty. The surgical specialties and radiology allow for more advances in technology. Like I said, I'm not sure what you are after.

 

[greg12345]

Anesthesiologists do plenty of research trying to find out which is the best yacht to buy.