Abstract:Although structured programs can provide step-wise research experiences of increasing intensity, students may not experience a training pipeline in which each stage relies on those before and after, and instead may sample an a la carte selection of research-based enrichment opportunities.
“…The data extraction and quality assessment worksheet and the relevant sensitivity plots can also be found in the supporting information files ( S3 and S4 Files , respectively) [7,8,10,11,23–90]. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both of these outcomes are explorative in nature (rely on proportions rather than odds ratios) and have been quantitatively pooled to yield a weighed estimate value. The results have been summarized in Fig 3 [7,10,26,28,32,47–49,52,54,55,58,63,67–69,71–75,80–82,85,90–92] . …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first outcome has been summarized in Fig 6 [10,24,25,27,29–31,37,38,41,49,64,75,76,93,106] and the latter two are shown in Fig 7 [8,25,26,31,43,44,66,68,81,83,85,90]. …”
ImportanceDespite the rapidly declining number of physician-investigators, there is no consistent structure within medical education so far for involving medical students in research.ObjectiveTo conduct an integrated mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies about medical students' participation in research, and to evaluate the evidence in order to guide policy decision-making regarding this issue.Evidence ReviewWe followed the PRISMA statement guidelines during the preparation of this review and meta-analysis. We searched various databases as well as the bibliographies of the included studies between March 2012 and September 2013. We identified all relevant quantitative and qualitative studies assessing the effect of medical student participation in research, without restrictions regarding study design or publication date. Prespecified outcome-specific quality criteria were used to judge the admission of each quantitative outcome into the meta-analysis. Initial screening of titles and abstracts resulted in the retrieval of 256 articles for full-text assessment. Eventually, 79 articles were included in our study, including eight qualitative studies. An integrated approach was used to combine quantitative and qualitative studies into a single synthesis. Once all included studies were identified, a data-driven thematic analysis was performed.Findings and ConclusionsMedical student participation in research is associated with improved short- and long- term scientific productivity, more informed career choices and improved knowledge about-, interest in- and attitudes towards research. Financial worries, gender, having a higher degree (MSc or PhD) before matriculation and perceived competitiveness of the residency of choice are among the factors that affect the engagement of medical students in research and/or their scientific productivity. Intercalated BSc degrees, mandatory graduation theses and curricular research components may help in standardizing research education during medical school.
“…The data extraction and quality assessment worksheet and the relevant sensitivity plots can also be found in the supporting information files ( S3 and S4 Files , respectively) [7,8,10,11,23–90]. …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both of these outcomes are explorative in nature (rely on proportions rather than odds ratios) and have been quantitatively pooled to yield a weighed estimate value. The results have been summarized in Fig 3 [7,10,26,28,32,47–49,52,54,55,58,63,67–69,71–75,80–82,85,90–92] . …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first outcome has been summarized in Fig 6 [10,24,25,27,29–31,37,38,41,49,64,75,76,93,106] and the latter two are shown in Fig 7 [8,25,26,31,43,44,66,68,81,83,85,90]. …”
ImportanceDespite the rapidly declining number of physician-investigators, there is no consistent structure within medical education so far for involving medical students in research.ObjectiveTo conduct an integrated mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies about medical students' participation in research, and to evaluate the evidence in order to guide policy decision-making regarding this issue.Evidence ReviewWe followed the PRISMA statement guidelines during the preparation of this review and meta-analysis. We searched various databases as well as the bibliographies of the included studies between March 2012 and September 2013. We identified all relevant quantitative and qualitative studies assessing the effect of medical student participation in research, without restrictions regarding study design or publication date. Prespecified outcome-specific quality criteria were used to judge the admission of each quantitative outcome into the meta-analysis. Initial screening of titles and abstracts resulted in the retrieval of 256 articles for full-text assessment. Eventually, 79 articles were included in our study, including eight qualitative studies. An integrated approach was used to combine quantitative and qualitative studies into a single synthesis. Once all included studies were identified, a data-driven thematic analysis was performed.Findings and ConclusionsMedical student participation in research is associated with improved short- and long- term scientific productivity, more informed career choices and improved knowledge about-, interest in- and attitudes towards research. Financial worries, gender, having a higher degree (MSc or PhD) before matriculation and perceived competitiveness of the residency of choice are among the factors that affect the engagement of medical students in research and/or their scientific productivity. Intercalated BSc degrees, mandatory graduation theses and curricular research components may help in standardizing research education during medical school.
“…These courses aim to offer students' opportunities to acquire basic skills of research through theoretical and practical sessions. Generally, the common barriers to undergraduate medical research programs include lack of (1) logistics and infrastructure support, (2) defined set of skills to be developed through research processes, (3) protected time in the curriculum, (4) project selection so that students can provide meaningful contributions, and (5) feedback so that the research process becomes a learning experience (Nathan 1998;Moskowitz & Thompson 2001;Langhammer et al 2009). In contrast, the URC at Alfaisal University College of Medicine developed a central body which was able to overcome most of the aforementioned barriers by identifying and securing research positions at internationally and locally reputed laboratories.…”
Research involvement by medical students is an essential need of the twenty-first century and models like URC could provide crucial platform for research training to the new generation of physician-scientists.
“…Preclinical students tend to focus on basic science research 23 while clinical students are generally more interested in clinical research. 24 It has been reported that senior medical students can be productive even during research electives as short as 4 weeks. 25 Regardless of the amount of time spent, early exposure can help the student realize if they are suitable for research.…”
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.