Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34460291›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2021

An Exploration across Institution Types of Undergraduate Life Sciences Student Decisions to Stay in or Leave an Academic-Year Research Experience.

Logan E Gin, Carolyn E Clark, Deanna B Elliott, Travis B Roderick, Rachel A Scott, Denisse Arellano, Diana Ramirez, Cindy Vargas, Kimberly Velarde, Allyson Aeschliman and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Implementation and Evaluation of a Biochemistry Research Skills CURE for First-Year R1 University Students.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
    Article
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

21 authors.

Logan E GinResearch for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences.
Carolyn E ClarkNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Deanna B ElliottNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Travis B RoderickNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Rachel A ScottResearch for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences.
Denisse ArellanoNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Diana RamirezNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Cindy VargasNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Kimberly VelardeNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Allyson AeschlimanNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Sarah T AvalleNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Jessica BerkheimerNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Rachel CamposNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Michael GerbasiNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Sophia HughesNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Julie A RobertsNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Quinn M WhiteNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Ehren WittekindNSF LEAP Scholars, Research for Inclusive STEM Education Center.
Yi ZhengMary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85281.
Katelyn M CooperResearch for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences.
Sara E BrownellResearch for Inclusive STEM Education Center, School of Life Sciences.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Undergraduate research is one of the most valuable activities an undergraduate can engage in because of its benefits, and studies have shown that longer experiences are more beneficial. However, prior research has illuminated that undergraduates encounter challenges that may cause them to exit research prematurely. These studies have been almost exclusively conducted at research-intensive (R1) institutions, and it is unclear whether such challenges are generalizable to other institution types. To address this, we extended a study previously conducted at public R1 institutions. In the current study, we analyze data from 1262 students across 25 public R1s, 12 private R1s, 30 master's-granting institutions, and 20 primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs) to assess 1) to what extent institution type predicts students' decisions to persist in undergraduate research and 2) what factors affect students' decisions to either stay in or consider leaving their undergraduate research experiences (UREs) at different institution types. We found students at public R1s are more likely to leave their UREs compared with students at master's-granting institutions and PUIs. However, there are few differences in why students enrolled at different institution types consider leaving or choose to stay in their UREs. This work highlights the importance of studying undergraduate research across institutions.

Indexed as

Biological Science DisciplinesStudentsHumans

Identifiers

PMID34460291
PMCPMC8715808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.