ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Evaluating the experiences of Vietnamese university students enrolled in a longitudinal research cohort: a journey mapping approach.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Engaging young people in health research offers mutual benefits for both participants and research teams. While a variety of approaches have been used globally to involve youth, few studies have evaluated their effectiveness and impact. Methods: From 2020 to 2023, we conducted the SEED project to explore attitudes toward clinical research involving human participants among 539 Vietnamese health professions students. The project concluded with an evaluation of the students' experiences as project participants, using a mixed-methods journey mapping approach. For this we conducted in-depth exit interviews with 18 purposively selected students and analyzed 231 study completion questionnaires, as well as 815 feedback forms collected during the life of the project. Results: Findings are presented in three areas: (1) Students' motivations to join and views about their experiences as participants; (2) Their evaluation of organizational factors; and (3) Their overall views about the project and scientific research generally. As well as having an interest in research (195/231, 84%), for many students the potential for personal benefit, such as gaining new knowledge (161/231, 70%), enhancing soft skills (161/231, 70%), and exposure to networking opportunities (126/231, 55%), were major motivating factors. However, factors such as receiving a project attendance certificate, the financial compensation offered, the reputation of the research institution, and encouragement by friends, were not considered important by many students (42-46%). Among students who attended at least one event, 217/220 (99%) reported high satisfaction with the project implementation, engagement approaches and activity topics, and generally preferred offline to online events. Suggested improvements included incorporating more interactive games, using smaller discussion groups, and strengthening communication via social media to support retention. 145/231 (63%) of the students mentioned at least one barrier to participation, with a busy schedule being the most common(127/145, 87%). For some of the interviewed participants, altruistic motivation- the sense of contributing to science and community-influenced their continuing participation. Conclusion: This comprehensive participant-centered evaluation of the experiences of Vietnamese healthcare students enrolled in a longitudinal cohort study emphasizes the value of engaging with students to co-develop scientific activities, thereby providing important benefits for the students, the academic institutions, and the broader research community.
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.