ArticlePloS one2026
Exploring undergraduate medical students' perception of an integrated longitudinal research curriculum within a competency-based framework.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmbedding research training in undergraduate medical education strengthens analytical skills, scientific reasoning, and evidence-based practice, yet such training is often short-term or elective, with limited evidence from the Middle East. At our medical university, a mandatory longitudinal research curriculum was implemented with progressive skill development. Building on our previous work on the sequential integration of research methods, this study evaluates students' perceptions of the program.
aimTo investigate the perceived value, impact, and barriers of a longitudinal research curriculum among undergraduate medical students.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among students who completed five compulsory research courses. The curriculum provided structured competencies through integrated content, protected time, and formal supervision. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire comprising demographics and 31 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale, assessing research perceptions and scholarly activities. Exploratory factor analysis identified five domains. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and sampling adequacy (KMO test) were confirmed, with factor loadings ≥0.50 considered acceptable (p < 0.05).
resultsA total of 106 students completed the survey (67.9% female, 32.1% male; mean age 23 years (SD = 1.8)). Overall perceptions toward research were positive, total mean score of 162.17 (SD = 17.12), corresponding to 74.5% agreement. The highest-rated domains were positive attitude toward research (mean = 37.62, 89.6%), perceived relevance (mean = 40.30, 85.7%), and perceived necessity (mean = 37.14, 75.8%), indicating strong endorsement of research for clinical training and career development. Challenge-related domains showed moderate agreement (61.2%), reflecting research barriers and dissemination challenges.
conclusionStudents strongly endorsed structured research training for professional competency development, and despite reported challenges, demonstrated a positive research orientation suggestive of sustained engagement. This study provides a novel evaluation of a mandatory longitudinal research curriculum in the Middle East. It addresses a critical regional gap and offers a model for integrating research training into undergraduate medical programs that support the development of clinician-scientists.
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.