ArticleBMC medical education2026
The educational outcomes of medical student engagement in research projects: a scoping review.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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.
- The mediating role of psychological resilience and coping styles among Chinese medical students in the relationship between perceived social support and learning engagement among medical students.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the late nineteenth century, research training has formed a core component of medical education. Research experiences aim to cultivate critical thinking, information literacy and readiness for evidence-based practice, whilst also supporting the development of future clinician-scientists. Although student involvement in research is widespread, the specific competencies acquired remain poorly characterised. This scoping review explored the existing literature on the educational outcomes associated with medical student engagement in research projects.
methodsThis review adhered to the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review protocol. A systematic search of MEDLINE, ERIC and Scopus was undertaken, supplemented by citation chaining. Eligible articles were English-language studies published between 2015 and 2025. Two reviewers independently screened all records, extracted data and conducted analysis using descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis. A modified Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist was used for quality appraisal.
resultsThe search retrieved 1089 records, of which 62 met inclusion criteria. Studies varied widely in design (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods), program structure (mandatory, elective, summer and extracurricular formats) and student cohort level. Most articles were rated as high quality. Research skills were the most frequently described outcomes, including improvements in study design, data analysis and scientific writing. Professional skills such as critical thinking, collaboration and independence were also commonly reported. Attitudinal outcomes varied, with several studies noting increased interest in research and others reporting neutral or negative shifts. Publication outputs were frequently documented but showed substantial variability across programs and settings. Only a minority of studies examined contextual or pedagogical factors such as mentorship, program duration or level of learner autonomy that may influence the development of these outcomes.
conclusionMedical student research experiences support the development of a range of research, professional and attitudinal outcomes, although these gains are inconsistently realised across different program designs and learning environments. The heterogeneity of study contexts and reporting practices limits comparability across the literature. Future studies should investigate the determinants of learning within research projects and develop competency-based frameworks to enable more rigorous and standardised evaluation of educational 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.