We surveyed over 540 physicians and nurses to understand more about what they perceive confers upon a colleague the reputation of "expert."

1. DEFINING AN EXPERT
CLINICIAN
2014 SURVEY RESULTS & INSIGHTS

2. Working with leading experts to create our roundtable
discussions, we are often asked:
“What criteria do you consider when
choosing an expert?”
We reached out to our readership and surveyed over
5,000 healthcare professionals
with over 540 answering our online survey.
Here are the results from doctors and nurses:

3. WHAT ISTHEVALUE
OF AN EXPERT?
To find out we asked: “An expert clinician is someone…”
Physicians and nurses seek
expert opinion to guide
them in their professional
healthcare missions.
Almost 50% disagreed
with the notion that
working with pharma
would disqualify
expertise.
Comment sentiments revealed:
“who is approachable and loves to share their knowledge base in patient care”
“who makes me think beyond my bounds and opens my own insight while
challenging me”
“who I would turn to for advice for my own care or that of a family member”

4. GENERAL CRITERIA OF EXPERTISE
PHYSICIANS’ PERSPECTIVE
MDs ranked the following elements #1 in determining expert reputation:
Clinically Active - Touching Patients (28%)
Recognized by Peers (24%)
Publishes Relevant Materials (10.5%)
Board Certifications (8.5%)
Other choices garnered 5% or less of the #1 ranking (in descending order):
Participates in Educational Scientific Programs
Clinical Research Principal Investigator
AcademicTraining
Clinical Research
Available for Discourse and Debate
Institutions Worked In
Teaches Students Regularly
Awards & Funding Received
Active in Society Leadership

5. GENERAL CRITERIA OF EXPERTISE
NURSES’ PERSPECTIVE
RNs & NPs ranked the following elements #1 in determining expert reputation:
Clinically Active - Touching Patients (35%)
Board Certifications (12%)
Recognized by Peers (10%)
Clinical Research - Principal Investigator (9%)
Clinical Research - Involved in Studies (9%)
Publishes Relevant Materials (6%)
!
Other choices garnered 5% or less of the #1 ranking (in descending order):
Institutions Worked In
AcademicTraining
Teaches Students Regularly
Participates in Educational Scientific Programs
Awards & Funding Received
Clinical Research Principal Investigator
Available for Discourse and Debate
Active in Society Leadership

6. PUBLISHING CRITERIA
Not surprisingly, physicians considered “traditional”
authorship and editorial roles in journals and
textbooks as highly or moderately indicative of
expertise.
More “contemporary” media such as blogging,
podcasting and online video did not seem to
indicate expertise.
Nurses followed suit on “traditional” and
“contemporary” modes.
Notably there was a fall off in the perceived
value of peer reviewing to journal editing - the
opposite of the physicians’ perspective on these
roles contributing to expertise.

7. INSTITUTION CRITERIA
Physicians reserved their top 3 rankings
mostly for University Hospitals and
Multispecialty Academic Centers (MACs),
whileVAs and Community Hospitals were
not considered for the top slots.
Even though MCOs finished in the second
lowest position, this category garnered the
most combined #1 and #2 rankings.
Physicians were mostly interested in the
“reputation of the institution” rather than
what type.
Nurses agreed with physicians regarding
“reputation of the institution” over the
type as indicia of expertise.
However, they spent their top 3 picks
mostly on MACs, equating them with
MCOs from a physician’s perspective.
Surprisingly, nurses considered Individual
Practice on par with MACs.

8. PATIENT PANEL SIZE
Physicians (47%) and Nurses (48%) overwhelmingly agreed that patient panel size would not
be considered as indicating “expertise.”
When contrasted with their responses which consider “Clinically Active -Touching Patients”
as the #1 general criteria, there seems to be a disconnect.
!
The respondents’ comments could resolve the disconnect which emphasized:
!
Expertise is not dependent upon the absolute quantity of patients, but
rather the # of patients relative to the specialty of expertise.
26% of Physicians and Nurses agreed that a patient panel size of 1,500-2,000 would
indicate expertise for a physician running an internist or family practice.

9. YEARS IN PRACTICE
Nurses Physicians
Physicians and Nurses agreed expertise can be attained within a range of 6-15 years of clinical
practice, leaning more toward 6-10 years than 11-15 years. Some commentary suggested as little as 5
years could confer expertise.
Comment sentiments revealed:
“at least 5 years”
“more than 5 years”
“minimum of 5 consecutive years in one area
to approach an expert status”
“one needs at least 5 years experience to have
well-rounded background”

10. # OF SCIENTIFIC
PAPERS PUBLISHED
Nurses Physicians
Physicians (53%) and Nurses (51%) responded the number of papers does not indicate expertise,
however, 34% indicated that up to 50 papers would be a suitable marker of expertise.
Comment sentiments revealed:
“authoring only indicates you write about what
you do, not that you do it well”
“publish or perish mentality undermines clinical
expertise”
“I don’t really care about the papers”
“does not indicate expertise, only a willingness
to do research”

11. TYPES OF SPEAKING
ENGAGEMENTS
Nurses Physicians
Physicians and Nurses overwhelmingly agreed that speaking at a National Conference (average
75%) or a Specialty Conference (average 62%) would indicate expertise.
Comment sentiments revealed:
“conference speakers, particularly
nationally, are heavily influenced by the
industry sponsors of the conference”
“some true experts are not ubiquitous
on speaker panels, but other not-so-
expert physicians turn up all the time”
respondents were permitted to choose more than one answer

12. CHOOSING CONFERENCE
SESSIONS
Nurses Physicians
When asked to rank the criteria used to select which sessions they would attend at a national conference,
predictably Physicians and Nurses overwhelmingly ranked “topic” #1 (88%) while the identity of the
speaker only garnered 11% of the #1 picks.
Comment sentiments revealed:
“while I generally choose a topic in my field,
the speaker can sometime sway my choice
if the topic could also be relevant”
“the identity of the speaker is very
important, but it does not override my
desire to learn within my discipline”
“could attend for the speaker if its an
important late-breaking trial result”
respondents were permitted to choose more than one answer

13. INSIGHTS INTO
CLINICAL EXPERTISE
• Physicians and nurses agree on the overwhelming value
of touching patients conferring clinical expertise.
• Peer recognition is almost as greatly valued by
physicians as touching patients.
• Board certifications and traditional publishing are
considered valuable indicators of expertise.
• Academic training, institutional employment, clinical
research, society leadership and teaching are not strong
indicators of expertise.
• Traditional authorship of journal articles and textbooks
indicates expertise, while more contemporary media
such as blogging, podcasts and video series are not.
• Institutions of employment seem to be regarded on a
case by case basis more significantly than other criteria.
• Absolute patient panel sizes are not indicative;
number of patients relevant to the type and
complexity of the practice can contribute to
expertise if the practice is “active” for that type.
• A minimum of 5 continuous years of practice in an
area indicates expertise, with a range of 6-10 years
being an accepted norm.
• The quantity of scientific papers is not indicative of
expertise - although between 1-50 may show
expertise.
• Speaking at a national conference can confer
expertise.
• Conference attendees are generally not persuaded
to attend a session by “who” is speaking so much as
“what” topic they are speaking about.

14. WHAT DOES A CLINICAL
EXPERT LOOK LIKE?
• This individual is board certified and has at least 5 - 10 years in an
active “patient-touching practice” in a singular area of medicine.
• In addition, this individual is has been recognized by their peers in
the field, is sought after, spoken at a national, specialty or regional
conference and has published in traditional journals or textbooks.
• Additional expertise may be conferred if the institution in which the
professional works is considered excellent relative to their specialty.
• Clinical research, publishing more than 50 papers, or academic
training are dubious indicators of clinical expertise.

15. • We submit that gauging expertise is open to vigorous debate, individual
perspective, and specific combinations of circumstances. Our goal here is to
provide generalized insights from the perspectives of readers of The Medical
Roundtable.
• Our attempt to normalize various disparate and conflicting criteria is not
intended to otherwise critique any particular individual or institution.
• The Medical Roundtable continues to provide surveys and insights as we
execute our mission to “Add Experience to the Evidence”
What are your thoughts?
Comment on slideshare or email us at
info@themedicalroundtable.com

16. For more information:
T.Anthony Howell | Publisher
thowell@themedicalroundtable.com
(203) 253-5906