Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34457935›Full record

ReviewMedical science educator2021

Teaching Medical Research to Medical Students: a Systematic Review.

Gabriel Sheng Jie Lee, Yip Han Chin, Aimei Amy Jiang, Cheng Han Mg, Kameswara Rishi Yeshayahu Nistala, Shridhar Ganpathi Iyer, Shuh Shing Lee, Choon Seng Chong, Dujeepa D Samarasekera

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical science educator, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Med Students SOAR: A Model for Immersive Oncology Research Training for Early Medical Trainees.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gabriel Sheng Jie LeeYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Yip Han ChinYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Aimei Amy JiangYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Cheng Han MgYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Kameswara Rishi Yeshayahu NistalaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Shridhar Ganpathi IyerDivision of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Shuh Shing LeeCentre for Medical Education, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Choon Seng ChongYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-0669-7307
Dujeepa D SamarasekeraCentre for Medical Education, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
National University of Singapore · SGNational University Hospital · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

phenomenonResearch literacy remains important for equipping clinicians with the analytical skills to tackle an ever-evolving medical landscape and maintain an evidence-based approach when treating patients. While the role of research in medical education has been justified and established, the nuances involving modes of instruction and relevant outcomes for students have yet to be analyzed. Institutions acknowledge an increasing need to dedicate time and resources towards educating medical undergraduates on research but have individually implemented different pedagogies over differing lengths of time. APPROACH: While individual studies have evaluated the efficacy of these curricula, the evaluations of educational methods and curriculum design have not been reviewed systematically. This study thereby aims to perform a systematic review of studies incorporating research into the undergraduate medical curriculum, to provide insights on various pedagogies utilized to educate medical students on research.

findingsStudies predominantly described two major components of research curricula-(1) imparting basic research skills and the (2) longitudinal application of research skills. Studies were assessed according to the 4-level Kirkpatrick model for evaluation. Programs that spanned minimally an academic year had the greatest proportion of level 3 outcomes (50%). One study observed a level 4 outcome by assessing the post-intervention effects on participants. Studies primarily highlighted a shortage of time (53%), resulting in inadequate coverage of content. INSIGHTS: This study highlighted the value in long-term programs that support students in acquiring research skills, by providing appropriate mentors, resources, and guidance to facilitate their learning. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition underscored the importance of tailoring educational interventions to allow students with varying experience to develop their skills. There is still room for further investigation of multiple factors such as duration of intervention, student voluntariness, and participants' prior research experience. Nevertheless, it stands that mentoring is a crucial aspect of curricula that has allowed studies to achieve level 3 Kirkpatrick outcomes and engender enduring changes in students. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-020-01183-w.

Indexed as

CurriculaDreyfus modelMedical undergraduatesResearch educationSkill acquisition

Identifiers

PMID34457935
PMCPMC8368360
OpenAlexW3119048628

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.