The amount and quality of clinical research are constantly increasing; however, the translation of results into daily practice is not keeping pace. University curricula provide minimal methodological background for understanding the latest scientific findings. In this project, we aimed to investigate the quality and amount of clinical research compared with basic research by analysing ten doctoral schools in Hungary. We found that 71% of PhD theses were submitted in basic sciences. The majority of physicians (53%) working in clinical institutions did their PhD projects in theoretical departments. Importantly, recent clinical methodologies such as pre-registered randomized clinical trials and meta-analysis are only rarely used (1% and 1%, respectively) compared with retrospective data analysis or cross-sectional studies (30% and 43%, respectively). Quality measures such as international registration, sample size calculation, and multicentricity of clinical sciences are generally absent from articles. Our results suggest that doctoral schools are seriously lagging behind in both teaching and scholarly activity in terms of recent clinical research methodology. Innovation and new educational platforms are essential to improve the proportion of science-oriented physicians.

临床研究的数量和质量不断提高；然而，将成果转化为日常实践的步伐却未能跟上。大学课程为理解最新的科学发现提供了最少的方法背景。在这个项目中，我们旨在通过分析匈牙利的十所博士学院来调查临床研究与基础研究的质量和数量。我们发现 71% 的博士论文是在基础科学领域提交的。大多数在临床机构工作的医生（53%）在理论部门完成了博士学位项目。重要的是，与回顾性数据分析或横断面研究（分别为 30% 和 43%）相比，最近的临床方法（例如预先注册的随机临床试验和荟萃分析）很少使用（分别为 1% 和 1%）。文章中通常缺乏国际注册、样本量计算和临床科学多中心性等质量衡量标准。我们的结果表明，就最近的临床研究方法而言，博士生学院在教学和学术活动方面都严重落后。创新和新的教育平台对于提高科学型医生的比例至关重要。