ArticleSpartan medical research journal2025
Descriptive Characteristics of Undergraduate Research Associate Programs in the United States: Findings from a National Registry.
Article in Spartan medical research journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing Clinical Insight, Medical Education, and Global Health: A Synthesis of Evidence-Based Research and Interdisciplinary Innovation.Spartan medical research journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: University undergraduate students often seek opportunities to gain exposure to clinical research. Physician residency training programs must engage in scholarly activities and publish their findings. "Research associate programs" (RAPs) can aid with Graduate Medical Education (GME) research. This is the first collective description of these US programs, using data from the Registry of American Research Associates Programs. Methods: The American Research Associates Program Registry (ARAPR) was started in 2014 and developed through Medline, direct familiarity, comprehensive online search, and chain-referral sampling. Data fields were selected based on a literature review and an expert panel, and included leadership, funding, research types, training, associates' activities, university affiliation, and the selection process. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Responses were from 40 of 50 RAPs (80.0%) with a mean of 24 undergraduate associates (SD = 16, range 5-70) in each program. Associates worked on investigator-initiated projects (34/40, 85.0%), prospective research (35/40, 87.5%), retrospective reviews (25/40, 62.5%), and informed consent (38/40, 95.0%). Some also involved associates with data abstraction, protocol development, abstract writing, manuscript preparation, and quality improvement. Most required college course enrollment (25/40, 62.5%). Training included patient confidentiality (HIPAA) and research ethics (39/40, 97.5%). Conclusions: This survey provides the first collective descriptive insight into the structures, training, and activities of RAPs. These findings serve as a foundation for institutions considering establishing such programs and highlight the need for future research on measurable outcomes such as student trajectories, publication rates, and program impact.
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.