Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40657708›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025

Implementing team science in undergraduate medical physics research.

Ashley J Cetnar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Ashley J CetnarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4004-0763

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMany undergraduate students are eager to learn more about potential career opportunities. While physics majors are often aware of research opportunities within their home department, students may not be aware of how physics can be applied in medicine. An alternate framework for a 10-week summer undergraduate research experience using a collaborative Team Science approach is presented.

methodsThe Team Science program is described, with feasibility shared based on the experiences of four students who piloted the program. Students explored four different projects throughout the summer as part of the 10-week program and assumed different team roles for each project fostering experience understanding team dynamics. Changes in student attitudes toward science research were quantified using validated surveys and qualitative responses are also summarized.

resultsAverage self-reported student scores in the Attitudes and Approaches to Problem Solving Survey increased 9.8% and Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for Experimental Physics increased 14.2% after the summer research experience. Areas with the highest reported gains from the program from the Undergraduate Research Student Self-Assessment Survey included understanding what everyday research work is like, engaging in real-world science research, and preparation for the future.

conclusionsUsing a Team Science approach allowed for students to explore multiple research questions during the summer and experience a more authentic and integrated approach to how research is conducted. This model can be expanded and adapted for students to identify medical physics as a career for applying their physics knowledge to solve problems that will advance human health earlier in their career.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateHealth PhysicsResearchCooperative BehaviorCurriculumHumansProblem SolvingSurveys and Questionnaireseducationteam scienceundergraduate research

Identifiers

PMID40657708
PMCPMC12257336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.