Literature DB >> 34457981

Impact of A Required, Longitudinal Scholarly Project in Medical School: A Content Analysis of Medical Students' Reflections.

Tanya Nikiforova1, Andrea Carter1, Judy C Chang1,2, Donald B DeFranco3, Peter J Veldkamp1, Arthur S Levine4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Medical schools increasingly require students to complete scholarly projects. Scholarly project programs that are required and longitudinal require considerable resources to implement. It is necessary to understand medical students' perspectives on the impact of such programs. Students at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine participate in a required, longitudinal research program (LRP) throughout all years of medical school training. Authors studied students' perceptions of this program.
METHODS: Fourth-year medical students submit a written report in which they reflect on their experience with the LRP. Qualitative analysis of students' written reflections was performed on 120 reports submitted 2012-2017. Content analysis was performed using an inductive approach in which investigators coded information and searched for emerging themes.
RESULTS: Four themes were identified. First, students described engaging in many steps of the research process, with many participating in projects from conception to completion. Second, students reported the LRP provided opportunities for leadership and independence, and many found this to be meaningful. Third, students developed appreciation for the difficulty of the research process through challenges encountered and practiced problem solving. Fourth, students acquired skills useful across multiple career paths, including critical appraisal of scientific literature, teamwork, and communication. DISCUSSION: Through participation in a required, longitudinal research program, medical students reported gaining valuable skills in leadership, problem solving, critical thinking, and communication. Students found that the longitudinal nature of the program enabled meaningful research experiences. These educational impacts may be worth the effort of implementing and maintaining longitudinal research experiences for medical students. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-021-01319-6. © International Association of Medical Science Educators 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Curricular evaluation; Medical school research; Qualitative research; Scholarly Research project; Scholarly project

Year:  2021        PMID: 34457981      PMCID: PMC8368882          DOI: 10.1007/s40670-021-01319-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Sci Educ        ISSN: 2156-8650


  14 in total

1.  Duke's 3rd year: a 35-year retrospective.

Authors:  D Blazer; W Bradford; C Reilly
Journal:  Teach Learn Med       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.414

Review 2.  The effectiveness of self-directed learning in health professions education: a systematic review.

Authors:  Mohammad H Murad; Fernando Coto-Yglesias; Prathibha Varkey; Larry J Prokop; Angela L Murad
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 6.251

3.  The Scholarly Project Initiative: introducing scholarship in medicine through a longitudinal, mentored curricular program.

Authors:  Nina Felice Schor; Philip Troen; Steven L Kanter; Arthur S Levine
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 4.  How to measure success: the impact of scholarly concentrations on students--a literature review.

Authors:  S Beth Bierer; Huiju Carrie Chen
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  Foreword: Scholarly concentrations in the medical student curriculum.

Authors:  Michael Boninger
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  The case for use of entrustable professional activities in undergraduate medical education.

Authors:  H Carrie Chen; W E Sjoukje van den Broek; Olle ten Cate
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 7.  A review of literature on medical students and scholarly research: experiences, attitudes, and outcomes.

Authors:  Youjin Chang; Christopher J Ramnanan
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 6.893

Review 8.  Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study.

Authors:  Mojtaba Vaismoradi; Hannele Turunen; Terese Bondas
Journal:  Nurs Health Sci       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 1.857

9.  The process of faculty-mentored student research in family medicine: motives and lessons.

Authors:  J Shapiro; P Coggan; A Rubel; D Morohasi; C Fitzpatrick; F Danque
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 1.756

10.  Implementation of a longitudinal mentored scholarly project: an approach at two medical schools.

Authors:  Michael Boninger; Philip Troen; Emily Green; Jeffrey Borkan; Cynthia Lance-Jones; Allen Humphrey; Philip Gruppuso; Peter Kant; James McGee; Michael Willochell; Nina Schor; Steven L Kanter; Arthur S Levine
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 6.893

View more
  1 in total

1.  Response to "Impact of a Required, Longitudinal Scholarly Project in Medical School: a Content Analysis of Medical Students' Reflections".

Authors:  Celina J Pook; Tabea Haas-Heger; Sophie Simmonds; Molly Kirkman; Suhaylah Adam
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2021-10-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.