ArticlePloS one2023
Implementation evaluation of a medical student-led intervention to enhance students' engagement with research: Findings and lessons learned.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Confounding by gender and academic year masks null effects of a Cooperative Training Community framework on undergraduate research outcomes: a mixed-methods study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- The next generation of physician-researchers: undergraduate medical students' and residents' attitudes, challenges, and approaches towards addressing them.BMC medical education · 2024Review
- Comparative analysis of factors and barriers intervening in research participation among romanian and international medical graduates from one romanian medical faculty across three generations.BMC medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedical colleges globally have student organizations that serve to enable students' involvement in research. However, details of their approach and activities are seldom published to serve as learning for student organizations in other settings. The Student Research Forum (SRF), a student organization based at a private medical school in Pakistan aims to facilitate students in acquiring research skills. Following the observation of a downward trajectory of student initiative and interest, SRF leadership restructured the organization and improve its impact. This study describes the development and implementation evaluation of the interventions. METHODOLOGY: The operational framework was revised using the Theory of Change by the core group. Major interventions included enhanced social media and outreach coordination, research workshops, journal clubs, and mentorship to increase research output, mentorship opportunities, and knowledge of medical research; ultimately improving quality in research. The outcomes generated over the course of the study's duration from July 2019 to September 2021 were analyzed using the process metrics of reach, adoption, and efficacy.
resultsAs a result of the interventions, SRF expanded its reach by conducting a total of 41 events during the duration of the study, facilitated by social media growth on each of SRF's online platforms, with a 300% increase in followers on Facebook, and a nationwide network of 91 student ambassadors. An annual workshop series taught research skills to more than 3800 participants. Students leading their own events, SRF featuring international speakers, and the abstracts submitted to SRF's annual conference, along with the conference's reach of 10,000 students, are seen as improvements in the ToC-informed interventions' adoption. The efficacy of the interventions manifested as the REACH program allocated 56 research projects to vetted applicants.
conclusionThe applied interventions have accelerated SRF's progress towards achieving its long-term outcome of increased quality in research as translated by increased research output quantity, mentorship, and knowledge of medical research. Further evaluation is required to assess the success of the ToC. As SRF continues to grow, a continued analysis of the implementation outcomes is imperative to gauge its effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.