Background
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has boosted medical students’ vulnerability to various problems. Given the stressful nature of medical disciplines, considerable attention must be paid to student support systems during pandemics. This study aimed to review the current literature regarding medical student support systems systematically.
Methods
We performed a systematic review of six databases and grey literature sources in addition to a hand search in the references of the articles on April 5, 2021. We included all studies about support for undergraduate medical students delivered in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In conducting this review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.
Results
A total of 3646 articles were retrieved from the databases, and 16 additional papers were extracted from other sources. After removing duplicates, we screened 2434 titles and abstracts according to our criteria. Among them, 32 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Ultimately, 10 studies were included for review. We identified two major themes: (a) academic support and (b) mental health support. All of the included studies utilized online methods whether for transitioning from previous support systems or developing novel approaches. Students and faculty members seemed to be receptive to these new systems. Despite indicating outstanding program outcomes, most studies merely described the positive effects of the program rather than providing a precise evaluation.
Conclusion
There are several methods of supporting medical students who are experiencing unprecedented changes in their educational trajectory. Due to substantial differences in undergraduate medical education in different regions of the world, cultural and contextual-oriented support is indispensable for developing a safe learning environment. Future research should investigate the question of the extent to which online support can supersede in-person strategies.
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has boosted medical students' vulnerability to various problems. Given the stressful nature of medical disciplines, considerable attention must be paid to student support systems during pandemics. This study aimed to review the current literature regarding medical student support systems systematically.Methods: We performed a systematic review of six databases and grey literature sources in addition to a hand search in the references of the articles in July 2020. We included all studies about support for undergraduate medical students delivered in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In conducting this review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.Results: A total of 5347 articles were retrieved from the databases, and 30 additional articles were extracted from other sources. After removing duplicates, we screened 3492 titles and abstracts according to our criteria. Among them, 51 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, before seven studies were ultimately included for reviewal. We identified two major themes: (a) academic support and (b) mental health support.Conclusion: There are several methods of supporting medical students while they are experiencing unprecedented changes in their educational trajectory. This review showed that, given the novel circumstances after the outbreak of COVID-19, the use of online student support methods had received more attention. Implications for further developments in student support systems in the time of the present pandemic were also discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.