Student Research Productivity Research Articles

Clinical Research Primer for Medical Students: Overview & Illustrative Experiences

Background The ability to participate in clinical scholarship is a foundational component of modern evidence-based medical practice, empowering improvement across essentially every aspect of clinical care. In tandem, the need for comprehensive exposure to clinical research has been identified as a critical component of medical student training and preparation for residency that is underserved by traditional undergraduate medical education (UME) models. The goal of the current work was to provide guidelines and recommendations to assist novice medical students in taking ownership of their research education. Methods The Clinical Research Primer was composed from pooled research documents compiled by the study authors and our institutional neurosurgery student research group. The Primer was then structured as the natural evolution of a research project from its inception through the submission process. Results We divided the foundational components of the Clinical Research Primer into seven domains, each representing a landmark in the development of a peer-reviewed study, and a set of skills critical for junior scholars to develop. These vital components included the following: Pitching & designing clinical studies, developing a research workflow, navigating the Institutional Review Board (IRB), data collection & analysis, manuscript writing & editing, submission mechanics, and tracking research projects for career development. Conclusion We anticipate that the tools included in the Clinical Research Primer will increase student research productivity and preparedness for residency. Although our recommendations are informed by our experiences within neurosurgery, they have been written in a manner that should generalize to almost any field of clinical study.

21. The Research Impact Score: Reframing How to Quantify Medical Student Research Productivity in Plastic Surgery

21. The Research Impact Score: Reframing How to Quantify Medical Student Research Productivity in Plastic Surgery

Medical Student Research Activity in Otolaryngology.

To investigate medical student research productivity by institutions associated with otolaryngology residency programs and identify correlates of productivity. Retrospective review. N/A. A systematic search for articles indexed on PubMed published by 116 programs from January 1, 2016 to February 28, 2021 was conducted. Primary outcomes were number of faculty publications, first-author medical student publications and medical students from each institution. Secondary outcomes included geographic region, number of otolaryngology faculty members, and program rankings. Nationally, the mean number of faculty per institution was 21.7 at the time of search. Over a 5-year period, there was a mean 98.7 total publications and 15.8 medical student first-author publications per institution consisting of a mean of 10.03 distinct medical students. One-way analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference in medical student productivity (P = .09) or department size (P = .12) between regions. Number of medical student first-author publications positively correlated to number of faculty (R = .43, P < .05) and number of faculty publications (R = .63, P < .05). The top 30 programs ranked by United States News & World Report or National Institute of Health for funding had a statistically significantly greater mean number of medical student first-author publications and distinct medical student first authors than all other programs (P < .05). Greater numbers of faculty members likely provide more mentorship and opportunities that allow medical students to engage in projects that lead to first-author publications. These findings allow institutions to reflect on efforts in medical student engagement and provide data to students for career planning.

Meta-Study of the Evolutionary Transformative Academic Landscape by Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

This article titled “The Evolutionary Transformative Academic Landscape by Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (Meta-Study)" explores the profound impact of AI and ML on education, particularly in the context of remote learning and the COVID-19 pandemic. The study systematically reviews the literature on AI in higher education, aiming to understand its pedagogical advantages and ethical implications. The objectives include assessing digital transformation in classrooms, evaluating the effectiveness of AI and ML in enhancing learning outcomes, examining their role in personalized learning and identifying areas for improvement. The research questions focus on the contribution of AI and ML in digital classrooms, their effectiveness in enhancing learning outcomes, and their role in supporting individualized learning. The literature review delves into AI and ML's role in academia, their impact on teaching, learning, and research, and the ethical considerations of their application. The study employs a meta-systematic review approach, incorporating statistical analyses and addressing ethical concerns to ensure AI's effective and ethical utilization in education. This study's findings indicate a positive correlation between implementing AI and ML technologies and improving student engagement, academic performance, research productivity, and teacher satisfaction. It highlights the necessity of further research to optimize AI use in education, considering software quality, student learning styles, and teacher integration skills. The study contributes to understanding the transformative role of AI and ML in reshaping education and fostering a more advanced, dynamic academic environment.

Conditioning factors for the scientific productivity of undergraduate students of health sciences at a private Peruvian University: A cross-sectional analytical study

Background The objective of this study was to determine the conditioning factors for scientific research productivity in university students of health sciences. Methods A cross-sectional analytical observational study was conducted. The study population was 4104 students enrolled during the 2021-I semester in the Faculty of Health Sciences of a private Peruvian university. A sample size of 400 students was determined and a stratified probability sampling was used. The variables were measured through surveys. The dependent variable was scientific research productivity, and the independent variables were institutional culture, knowledge management and technological capital. Summary measures are reported according to the type of variable. The chi-square test with a significance level of p&lt;0.05 was applied to assess the association between the variables of interest. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed using the Stepwise method. Prevalence ratios (PR) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated. Results From the total of 400 students, 74.5% were male, 57.25% were aged between 18 and 27 years, 17% belonged to the school of human medicine and 72% were in their sixth year of studies. Scientific research productivity was associated with management commitment (PR=1.493; 95%CI: 1.077–2.068, p=0.015), sense of personal growth (PR=1.632; 95%CI: 1.041–2.558; p=0.024), recognition by the university (PR=1.385; 95%CI: 1.012–1.896; p=0.043), strategic alliances (PR=1.422; 95%CI: 1.032–1.959; p=0. 03), having research proposals (PR=1.522; 95%CI: 1.114–2.08; p=0.009), dissemination of results obtained (PR=1.542; 95%CI: 1.12–2.122; p=0.01), availability of human resources (PR=1.591; 95%CI: 1.165–2.173; p=0.004), access to equipment and software (PR=1.482; 95%CI: 1.061–2.069; p=0.018) and to laboratories (PR=1.438; 95%CI: 1.047–1.974; p=0.024). Conclusion It is concluded that the research productivity of undergraduate students of health sciences is low. It is necessary to strengthen research promotion measures in universities for the control and monitoring of students’ scientific participation.

Research self-efficacy and research productivity of doctoral students in counselling programmes: research training environment as a moderator

ABSTRACT The current study investigated the relationship between research self-efficacy, perceived research training environment and research productivity among 174 doctoral students enrolled in counselling programmes in universities across the United States. Results indicated that students’ research self-efficacy was positively correlated with their research productivity, and research training environment was also positively related to their research productivity. Moreover, students’ perceived research training environment was found to moderate the relationship between research self-efficacy and research productivity. Implications for programme faculty and doctoral research training are discussed.

A Review of Medical Student First-Author Publications in Plastic Surgery.

The integrated plastic surgery residency match is a highly competitive process.If performed wisely, medical research is an opportunity to differentiate applications from peers, and productivity is closely evaluated by residency programs.In this study, the authors aimed to characterize medical student research productivity for integrated plastic surgery residency programs and their respective medical schools. To this end, the authors performed a retrospective review of senior author publications from the 81 integrated plastic surgery programs from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was a publication with a medical student as the first author.Secondary outcomes included the number of faculty from each program, the geographic region of the program, and the ranking of associated medical schools. It was found that the average number of medical student first-author publications and faculty members per institution were 14.0 and 11.0, respectively.There was a positive correlation between the number of faculty members and several medical student first-author publications for a program (R = 0.54, P < 0.0001). The average number of medical student first-author publications was higher in the top 25 programs than for the remaining programs (P < 0.001), and most medical student first-author publications in the United States were produced by 10 plastic surgery programs. From these findings, it was concluded that these programs associated with higher-ranking medical schools produce greater numbers of medical student first-author publications.These analyses of medical student academic productivity should be a highly useful guide for current and future medical students as they strategize their successful match into plastic surgery.

Doctoral student's research productivity during COVID-19: the effect of gender, parenthood, and conscientiousness

ABSTRACT The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctoral students’ research productivity is examined with a special focus on gender, parenthood, and the personality trait conscientiousness. Data consist of 614 doctoral students active in medicine, technology, the natural sciences in Sweden. Results indicate that the overall research productivity of doctoral students has increased during COVID-19. It is tested if the observed increase in research productivity depends on gender, parenthood, or conscientiousness. Hypotheses regarding a pandemic penalty for women and parents are not supported. However, results indicate that conscientiousness had a positive effect on doctoral students’ research productivity during the pandemic. It is concluded that conscientiousness has been an important factor in determining the research productivity of doctoral students during COVID-19. The results are discussed with regard to the national context of Sweden, where schools, childcare facilities, and laboratories were open to a larger extent during COVID-19 compared with many other countries.

Predictors of self-reported research productivity amongst medical students in the United Kingdom: a national cross-sectional survey

BackgroundThe number of academic clinicians in the UK is declining and there are demographic inequalities in the clinical-academic workforce. Increased research productivity by medical students is believed to reduce future attrition in the clinical-academic workforce. Thus, this study investigated the association between student demographics and research productivity amongst UK medical students.MethodsThis is a national multicentre cross-sectional study of UK medical students in the 2020/21 academic year. We appointed one student representative per medical school, and they disseminated a 42-item online questionnaire over nine weeks, through departmental emails and social media advertisements. The outcome measures were: (i) publications (yes/no) (ii) number of publications (iii) number of first-authored publications (iv) abstract presentation (yes/no). We utilised multiple logistic and zero-inflated Poisson regression analyses to test for associations between the outcome measures and predictor variables at a 5% significance level.ResultsThere are 41 medical schools in the UK. We received 1573 responses from 36 UK medical schools. We failed to recruit student representatives from three newly formed medical schools, whilst two medical schools prohibited us from sending the survey to their students. Women had lower odds of having a publication (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.33–0.85) and on average had fewer first-author publications than men (IRR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37–0.89). Compared to white students, mixed-ethnicity students had greater odds of having a publication (OR: 3.06, 95% CI: 1.67–5.59), an abstract presentation (OR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.37–3.26), and on average had a greater number of publications (IRR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.02–3.43). On average, students who attended independent UK secondary schools had a higher rate of first-author publications compared to those that attended state secondary schools (IRR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.23–3.15).ConclusionOur data suggest that there are gender, ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in research productivity among UK medical students. To tackle this, and potentially improve diversity in clinical academia, we recommend that medical schools should facilitate targeted high quality research mentorship, funding and training, especially for under-represented-in-medicine students.

Research productivity of first-year Canadian ophthalmology residents: a 12-year trend

ObjectiveResearch experience is one criterion of the selection process for applicants to residency training programs. We aim to quantify temporal trends in research productivity of medical students who matched into a canadian ophthalmology residency program. DesignRetrospective database review. ParticipantsA total of 465 residents commencing ophthalmology training from 2010 to 2022 in 15 Canadian ophthalmology residency programs. MethodsThe names of all residents commencing training in ophthalmology in all Canadian programs from 2010 to 2022 were identified. Bibliometric data including publication count and type, authorship position, and H-index corresponding to the match year were extracted from the Scopus database. Descriptive and univariate statistics were used to characterize and assess trends in research productivity. ResultsA total of 461 ophthalmology residents (99% complete data set) from all 15 residency programs representing 1179 publications, including 679 ophthalmology-related publications, were identified. Most publications were original research (676; 58%), followed by case reports and letters (324; 27%) and reviews (162; 14%). Overall, 62% of residents had at least 1 publication at the time of the match, with a mean of 2.56 ± 3.49 publications and a mean H-index of 1.03 ± 1.48 publications. There was a significant increase (p < 0.001) in all research productivity metrics except senior authorship in the period 2019–2022 compared with 2010–2018. Notably, 91% of residents had ≥1 publication in 2022 compared with 38% in 2010. ConclusionFirst-year ophthalmology resident publication productivity doubled from 2010–2016 to 2017–2022 suggesting a greater emphasis on scholarly work from medical trainees, a trend similar to that reported in other specialties.

Assessment of Research Mentorship During Medical School for Future Radiation Oncology Trainees

Assessment of Research Mentorship During Medical School for Future Radiation Oncology Trainees

Highlighting the Need for MD-PhD Programs in Developing Countries

In certain developing countries, research output in the medical field has been rising rapidly in the last few decades due to an increased focus on medical research development through different avenues.[1] These indicated an increase in the expenses on research projects, the launch of more research centers, and others.[1] [2] However, this is not the case for most developing countries. Compared with developing countries, developed countries have contributed a lot more to scientific publications in health research.[3] [4] Furthermore, the health research productivity of postgraduate students in low- and middle-income countries was found to be low.[5] In detail, the majority of students infrequently publish their theses. In addition, most published studies are cross-sectional in design, with hardly any clinical trials.[5] The reasons behind that vary, but many of them are common, including limited funding and resources, weak linkage between universities and stakeholders, limited facilities for research training and education, and limited access to health information and literature sources.[3] [6] Such problems have affected medical education in developing countries negatively. For example, in one of the low-income countries, Mozambique, for the period between 2004 and 2010, only 11% of Mozambican University faculty members had a PhD degree, and the shortage of human resources for teaching and mentoring in that country is still an ongoing problem.[7] It has also become clear that developing nations' clinical research needs to be improved if important issues are to be resolved and effective pandemic management tactics are to be selected. As an illustration, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which started in the Chinese city of Wuhan in 2019 and is brought on by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus that mostly affects the respiratory tract,[8] has had a major impact on public health in India. Following the second wave of COVID-19 in India, it has been argued that conducting research is essential for low- and middle-income countries so that resources can be allocated properly where they are needed and health systems can develop a greater understanding of what causes good and bad outcomes.[9]

Correlation Between Research Productivity During Medical School and Radiation Oncology Residency

This analysis investigates whether research productivity during medical school predicts future research productivity during radiation oncology residency. At our institution, there have been 20 medical students who graduated between 2005 and 2015 and subsequently completed their residency training in radiation oncology. We built a database of all PubMed-indexed publications in which these former students were the first author or coauthor. Mean publication rates with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were computed. The paired t test and McNemar-Bowker test of symmetry were used to examine differences in first-author and coauthor publications between the medical school and residency periods. An ordinal logistic regression model was employed to measure the odds ratio of publishing during residency versus during medical school. A Spearman correlation coefficient was calculated for the relationship between the number of publications during medical school and the number during residency. A total of 14 and 60 first-author publications (46 and 117 coauthor publications) were identified for 20 individuals during medical school and residency, respectively. There was an average of 0.7 (95% CI, 0.17-1.23) first-author publications during medical school and 3.08 (95% CI, 1.56-4.44) first-author publications during residency (P=.003). Only 15% (3/20) had ≥2 publications during medical school, and 50% (10/20) had ≥2 publications during residency (P=.012). The Spearman correlation coefficient between research publications before and during residency was .457 (P=.043). The mean number of coauthor publications during medical school and residency was 2.3 (95% CI, 0.92-3.68) and 5.85 (95% CI, 3.50-8.20), respectively (P=.004). Based on this retrospective analysis from our institution, student research productivity during medical school, as defined by the number of first-author publications, does correlate with future research productivity during radiation oncology residency.

Research productivity and training support for doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences.

Training of doctoral students as part of the next generation of the biomedical workforce is essential for sustaining the scientific enterprise in the United States. Training primarily occurs at institutions of higher education, and these trainees comprise an important part of the workforce at these institutions. Federal investment in the support of doctoral students in the biological and biomedical sciences is distributed differently than the distribution of students across different types of institutions, for example, public vs private. Institutions in states that historically receive less federal support for research also receive less support for doctoral student training. Doctorates at different types of institution exhibit little difference in research productivity, with the exception of citations, and subsequent receipt of additional NIH awards. Thus, training outcomes, which are related to the quality of the student and training environment, are similar across different institutions. Research productivity of doctoral students does not correlate with the number of F31s awarded to an institution. Factors that correlate with F31 funding include R01 funding levels and program size. The findings suggest strategies for institutions to increase success at securing F31s and modification of policy to promote more equitable distribution of F31s across institutions.

Trends in research productivity of medical students matching to surgical subspecialties within North America: a bibliometric analysis

Trends in research productivity of medical students matching to surgical subspecialties within North America: a bibliometric analysis

Predictors of dissertation publication in clinical and counseling psychology.

A doctoral dissertation constitutes a student's original research and a novel contribution to scientific knowledge. Yet, few psychology dissertations, particularly in professional subfields, are published in the peer-reviewed literature, and the reasons for this are unclear. The present study investigated student, advisor, and doctoral program variables that might predict dissertation publication in professional psychology. Using a stratified random cohort sample of 169 Ph.D. dissertations in clinical and counseling psychology, we conducted exhaustive searches to determine whether dissertation studies were published in peer-reviewed journals within 0-7 years following their completion. Logistic regression models were estimated to test whether dissertation publication was predicted by student and advisor prior research productivity, dissertation length, and doctoral program's training emphasis, accreditation status, and subfield. Results indicated that dissertations that were supervised by more research-productive advisors and that were relatively brief (<180 pages) were significantly more likely to be published in peer-reviewed journals. No other predictors were significant. Results are discussed with regard to implications for training and mentorship. Faculty advisors who publish frequently might be more likely to attract research-oriented students, to mentor students in preparing a publishable dissertation, and/or to encourage students to publish their dissertation research. By systematically promoting research dissemination as part of doctoral research training, graduate programs and faculty mentors in clinical and counseling psychology could help facilitate students' sharing their dissertation findings with the scientific community.

The effect of parenthood on doctoral student's academic socialization and research productivity

The effect of parenthood on doctoral student's academic socialization and research productivity

QS36. A Comprehensive Review of Medical Student First Author Publications in Plastic Surgery

Purpose: The integrated plastic surgery residency match is a highly competitive process. If performed wisely, medical research is an opportunity to differentiate application from peers, and productivity is closely evaluated by residency programs. In this study, we aimed to characterize medical student research productivity for integrated plastic surgery residency programs and their respective medical schools. Methods: A retrospective review of senior author publications from the 81 integrated plastic surgery programs from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 was performed. The primary outcome was publication with a medical student as the first author. Secondary outcomes included number of faculty from each program, geographic region of program, and ranking of associated medical school. Results: The average number of medical student first author publications and faculty members per institution were 14.0 and 11.0, respectively. There was a positive correlation between number of faculty members and number of medical student first author publications for a program (R = 0.54, p < 0.0001). The average number of medical student first author publications was higher at top 25 programs than for the remaining programs (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Most medical student first author publications in the United States are produced by 10 plastic surgery programs. Programs associated with higher ranking medical schools produce greater numbers of medical student first author publications. These analyses of medical student academic productivity should be a highly useful guide for current and future medical students as they strategize their successful match into plastic surgery.

The Impact of a Planned Strategy of Early Scientific Research Training on Medical Students’ Research Productivity

Student Research and Innovation Program (SRIP) is one of the major training programmes and is broadly used to promote students’ ability of scientific research. However, the exact impact of a planned strategy of early SRIP on the research productivity of medical students remains unknown. Here we conducted a complete and reliable questionnaire survey to investigate the situation of early SRIP in improving the research interests and the academic index was used to evaluate the research productivity in medical students. The results showed that more than half of medical students at Ningbo University School of Medicine participated in SRIPs in junior grades. Personal interest was a major motive and selective criteria for SRIP. Meanwhile, SRIP was found to be self-managed and well arranged in medical students. Interestingly, early scientific research training benefited students in both academic and non-academic achievements. The statistical analysis showed that the freshman participants yielded the most productive academic achievements. Additionally, the planned SRIP is considered useful, challengeable, and supportive for medical students. These findings reveal the potential value of the wider implementation of early SRIP throughout the school years in enhancing the research ability of medical students.&#x0D;

Attitude Over Knowledge and Skill: Enabler of Research Productivity (RP) Among Graduate Students in One State University in the Philippines

The aim of this study is to measure the research knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA) of graduate students and test whether the KSA are enablers of research productivity (RP) of graduate students. A descriptive-correlation research design of the research was employed with fifty purposively selected graduate students served as the respondents of the study. A validated research instrument consisting of 121 items was utilized with an average Cronbach’s alpha of 0.967. The questionnaire was administered before the classes in Advanced methods of research begins. Based on the study, the level of knowledge and skills of the graduate students were on the average level while their attitude was high. It was also found that the research productivity of graduate students considering the completed research, presented, published, and research with citations was low. Results of the study showed that attitude affects significantly research productivity. Problems on research writing of the graduate students based on the results include knowledge on statistical analysis, confidence, instrument preparation, among others. Several trainings requested by the respondents are included in the paper.