Assessing publication rates from medical students’ mandatory research projects in the Netherlands: a follow-up study of 10 cohorts of medical students

Abstract

ObjectivesThe medical field is facing a clinician-scientist shortage. Medical schools could foster the clinician-scientist workforce by offering students research opportunities. Most medical schools offer elective research programmes. Subsequently, a subset of doctors graduates without any research experience. Mandatory research projects may be more sufficient to develop clinician-scientist, but take more supervision and curricular time. There is limited insight in the scientific outcomes of mandatory research experiences. This study aims to examine publication rates of a mandatory research experience, identify factors associated with publication, and includes postgraduate research engagement.Design and settingProspective follow-up study involving 10 cohorts of medical students’ mandatory research projects from Leiden University Medical Center.ParticipantsAll medical students who conducted their research project between 2008 and 2018 (n=2329) were included.Main outcome measurePublication rates were defined as peer-reviewed scientific publications, including research papers, reviews, and published meeting abstracts. Postgraduate research engagement was defined as research participation and dissemination of research at scientific conferences or in journals.ResultsIn total, 644 (27.7%) of all mandatory research experiences resulted in publication, with students mainly as first (n=984, 42.5%) or second author (n=587, 25.3%) and above world average citation impact (mean normalised journal score 1.29, mean normalised citation score 1.23). Students who conducted their research in an academic centre (adjusted OR 2.82; 95% CI 2.10 to 3.77), extended their research (adjusted OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.20), were involved in an excellency track (adjusted OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.44 to 3.01), or conducted clinical (adjusted OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.15 to 3.74) or laboratory (adjusted OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.16 to 4.01) research published their research more often. Later as junior doctors, this group significantly more often disseminate their research results at scientific conferences (adjusted OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.23) or in journals (adjusted OR 1.98; 95% CI 1.14 to 3.43).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that a significant subset of hands-on mandatory research projects with flexible learning pathways result in tangible research output with proper impact and that such successful experiences can be considered as diving board towards a research-oriented career.

The impact of integrating a compulsory community-oriented research program within undergraduate medical curriculum on graduates' scientific publications: perspectives from Arabian Gulf University

“…Despite the observed greater impact of the mandatory research program at AGU on future medical graduates' scientific publications (54.9%) than those reported from similar studies in the USA (15.5%%) and the Netherlands (27.7%) (den Bakker et al, 2022;M€ oller & Shoshan, 2017), it would be difficult to relate this difference to the effectiveness of these research programs since the sample sizes and the follow up periods are not similar. However, collective evidence from multiple studies suggests that those with some research experience during their undergraduate education are more likely to publish than graduates who had no research experience as students (SCOTT SEGAL, Lloyd, Houts, Stillman, & Jungas, 1990).…”

“…Literature on follow-up of medical graduates from North American and European universities that adopt mandatory research projects shows that about one-third of doctors have published a paper or gave a presentation of a research project of their own at a scientific event (den Bakker, Ommering, van Leeuwen, Dekker, & De Beaufort, 2022;M€ oller & Shoshan, 2017). The scientific yield from teaching research skills at AGU within the medical curriculum presents a rewarding experience with many medical students having published their undergraduate research projects in peer-reviewed journals, for example (Al Dharman et al, 2022;AlAwadhi et al, 2020;Bubshait et al, 2021;Rasool et al, 2015) to mention some.…”

Medical students’ contribution to research; the scientific output of medical theses held in Moroccan medical schools during the last decade (2011-2021)

“…According to a previous study, 32.7% of New Zealand undergraduate medical theses resulted in scientific publications [ 9 ]. In the Netherlands, 27.7% of medical students had at least one publication as a result of their mandatory research projects [ 10 ], whereas in Turkey, the overall publication rate of health sciences and medical theses was 11.9% [ 11 ]. However, information regarding the rates of publishing of medical theses in different countries is limited.…”

The perils of publishing—Avoiding pit falls as an early career researcher

“…This, in turn, enhances the ability to critically read and review publications and provides the next generation of scientists with essential tools to investigate their own areas of expertise. In the medical field, the experience of research as an undergraduate, having published before a residency and the number of publications achieved during a residency have been shown to correlate positively with further publications after graduation and finishing of a residency, respectively 1,2 …”

“…In the medical field, the experience of research as an undergraduate, having published before a residency and the number of publications achieved during a residency have been shown to correlate positively with further publications after graduation and finishing of a residency, respectively. 1,2 However, planning, conducting and publishing a well-designed…”