Clinician-scientists in ophthalmology.

I T HAS BEEN ALMOST 10 years since the viability of the clinician-scientist in ophthalmology was considered in an ARCHIVES editorial. At that time, Epstein opined that many departments of ophthalmology had turned away from supporting clinician-scientists. The economic imperative of increasing patient care activities to compensate for shrinking clinical reimbursements was a central reason, among the several, that he identified as contributing to this emerging phenomenon. Even though it was likely that health care economics would be increasingly fractious, he concluded by advising the aspiring clinician-scientist to pursue this choice of careers as it was not only needed, but would provide opportunities for personal satisfaction and achievement. Since the publication of his editorial, there continue to be questions about the survival of the clinicianscientist in ophthalmology and whether this is still a viable career path. The past several years have been marked by financial instability of academic medical centers and their departments of ophthalmology. Moreover, despite the explosion of biomedical discovery and new opportunities for vision research, many academicians are even more pessimistic about the viability of the clinicianscientist. Therefore, it seems appropriate to reassess the subject. Who are the clinician-scientists in ophthalmology, and are they needed? Should they be supported and sustained? And if so, how?