ArticleMedical science educator2025
Student Engagement in Medical Research Curriculum Development Strategies: A Comprehensive Approach Utilizing Mixed-Methods Study and SWOT-TOWS-AHP Analysis.
Article in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Faculty Perspectives on AI Integration in Anatomy Education in the United Arab Emirates: Cross-Sectional Survey.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Barriers to undergraduate medical students' research engagement in Pakistan: a qualitative exploration.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Project-Based Approach as Methodology to Improve Academic Performance of Medical School Students Within the Research Line Teaching Course: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Involving Medical Students in the Curriculum Development of Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine: An Exploratory Qualitative Study.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Student engagement in medical curriculum development has become increasingly important, yet structured frameworks for decision-making and prioritizing strategies remain limited. This study demonstrates an approach integrating student representatives into strategy development to enhance engagement in medical research (MR) curriculum design and highlights students' perspectives on MR. Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted with 262 clinical year medical students and intern doctors. Participants completed a questionnaire on practices, perceptions, attitudes, motivations, and barriers related to MR. Focused group discussions evaluated beliefs towards MR and the faculty's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Thematic analysis was performed. Strategies were developed using the TOWS matrix, and student representatives ranked the strategies using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Results: MR is perceived as complex and nonessential, yet its benefits in career development, patient care, and knowledge advancement are well-recognized. The chance to pursue research on personally interesting topics motivates student engagement in MR. However, curriculum overload has emerged as a significant barrier. The opportunity-strength strategy received the highest priority score of 0.33. The preferred sub-strategy involves establishing a centralized communication and coordination system to connect expert professors in both pre-clinical and clinical medical fields, both within and outside the institution, thereby enhancing the diversity of available mentors (priority score = 0.12). Conclusion: To address curriculum overload, a centralized communication system and coordination between students and experts are necessary. Additionally, cultivating time management skills is essential. Involving students in curriculum development ensures that their perspectives and needs are considered, leading to the creation of insightful strategies.
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.