Assessing Undergraduate Neurology Pipeline Programs: A Systematic Review (P11-2.001)

Abstract

<h3>Objective:</h3> To assess undergraduate pipeline programs and their goals of garnering interest in careers in neurology, we conducted a systematic review of available literature on existing undergraduate neurology pipeline programs, and developed the PICO question: what pipeline programs in neurology have been designed and implemented to attract interest in neurology among undergraduate students? <h3>Background:</h3> Although current programs exist to encourage undergraduates to pursue neuroscience and neurology, few students pursue neurology, and there is a shortage of neurologists in the US. This gap is projected to worsen over time. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> An electronic database search of PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Education Source, and ERIC was conducted by a medical librarian based on a list of keywords developed by a team of undergraduates. Of the 2852 articles screened, 33 articles met the systematic review criteria and were systematically reviewed with information pertaining to the type and goal of the pipeline program, its delivery, and outcomes evaluation. <h3>Results:</h3> The 33 programs were classified into subtypes of pipeline programs, with programs focusing on student-led projects, early clinical research opportunities, the addition of activities or modules to enrich the neuroscience classroom, and neuroscience courses interdisciplinary with other areas of interest. All programs were found to be successful in gaining student interest in neurology, with exposure to relevant opportunities and classroom enrichment. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> The existing literature shows that neurology pipeline programs are successful in inspiring interest and guiding students to pursue the field in their graduate years. These programs are meaningful to students, and often supplement an undergraduate curriculum in neuroscience. Pipeline programs also introduce students to diverse fields related to neuroscience. Future work might explore additional longitudinal effects of exposure to neurology-related research and programs for undergraduates, while also building connections to those with more expertise in the field. <b>Disclosure:</b> Ms. Aymon has nothing to disclose. Ms. Yusaf has nothing to disclose. Miss Oza has nothing to disclose. Ms. Ekhtman has nothing to disclose. Ms. Lebowitz has nothing to disclose. Ms. Katara has nothing to disclose. Dr. Minen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for Pain Medicine Journal. The institution of Dr. Minen has received research support from NIH. Dr. Minen has received intellectual property interests from a discovery or technology relating to health care. Dr. Minen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a First Contact-Primary Care Advisory Board Member with American Headache Society . Dr. Minen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for PCORI grant on migraine evidence based map for stakeholders with ECRI . Ms. Plovnick has nothing to disclose.