Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Perspectives on Medical Education
Published in: Perspectives on Medical Education 4/2017

Open Access 01-08-2017 | Review Article

Scholarly concentration programs and medical student research productivity: a systematic review

Authors: Annika G. Havnaer, Allison J. Chen, Paul B. Greenberg

Published in: Perspectives on Medical Education | Issue 4/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Scholarly concentration programs have become a common method to promote student inquiry and independent research in medical schools. Given the high resource requirements of scholarly concentration program implementation, it is important to examine program efficacy. This systematic review examined the impact of scholarly concentration programs on student research productivity.

Methods

The authors carried out a literature search to find articles related to scholarly concentration program research productivity outcomes. The inclusion criterion was a method of rigorously evaluating program scholarly productivity. Study rigour was evaluated with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument.

Results

The initial search disclosed 2467 unique records: 78 were considered based on titles and abstracts; eight were considered by scanning references. Eleven papers met the inclusion criteria: all were descriptive; none had a priori hypotheses that examined predictors of medical student research productivity in scholarly concentration programs or prospectively evaluated program impact on student scholarly output.

Discussion

While few in number and often lacking in rigour, the studies included herein suggest that adequate administrative support, strong mentorship and tailored program characteristics are essential in facilitating student research productivity in scholarly concentration programs. Given the challenges inherent in medical education research, a conceptual framework based on United Way’s approach may help program planners and educators address this gap in the evaluation of scholarly concentration programs.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Bierer SB, Chen HC. How to measure success: the impact of scholarly concentrations on students – a literature review. Acad Med. 2010;85:438–52.CrossRef
2.
Green EP, Borkan JM, Pross SH, et al. Encouraging scholarship: medical school programs to promote student inquiry beyond the traditional medical curriculum. Acad Med. 2010;85:409–18.CrossRef
3.
Gotterer GS, O’Day D, Miller BM. The Emphasis Program: a scholarly concentrations program at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Acad Med. 2010;85:1717–24.CrossRef
4.
Ostrovsky A. Laying down new tracks: three mechanisms to incorporate scholarly activity into the medical school curriculum. Med Teach. 2010;32:521–3.CrossRef
5.
Parsonnet J, Gruppuso PA, Kanter SL, Boninger M. Required vs. elective research and in-depth scholarship programs in the medical student curriculum. Acad Med. 2010;85:405–8.CrossRef
6.
Boninger M, Troen P, Green E, et al. Implementation of a longitudinal mentored scholarly project: an approach at two medical schools. Acad Med. 2010;85:429–37.CrossRef
7.
8.
Solomon SS, Tom SC, Pichert J, Wasserman D, Powers AC. Impact of medical student research in the development of physician-scientists. J Investig Med. 2003;51:149–56.
9.
10.
Chang Y, Ramnanan CJ. A review of literature on medical students and scholarly research: experiences, attitudes, and outcomes. Acad Med. 2015;90:1162–73.CrossRef
11.
Education Group for Guidelines on Evaluation. Guidelines for evaluating papers on educational interventions. BMJ. 1999;318:1265–7.CrossRef
12.
Hutchinson L. Evaluating and researching the effectiveness of educational interventions. BMJ. 1999;318:1267–9.CrossRef
13.
Zier K, Friedman E, Smith L. Supportive programs increase medical students’ research interest and productivity. J Investig Med. 2006;54:201–7.CrossRef
14.
15.
16.
17.
Reed DA, Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Levine RB, Kern DE, Wright SM. Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. JAMA. 2007;298:1002–9.CrossRef
18.
Cook DA, Reed DA. Appraising the quality of medical education research methods: the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-Education. Acad Med. 2015;90:1067–76.CrossRef
19.
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.CrossRef
20.
Gonzales AO, Westfall J, Barley GE. Promoting medical student involvement in primary care research. Fam Med. 1998;30:113–6.
21.
Akman M, Unalan PC, Kalaca S, Kaya CA, Cifcili S, Uzuner A. A three-year mandatory student research program in an undergraduate medical curriculum in Turkey. Kuwait Med J. 2010;42:106–11.
22.
Ogunyemi D, Bazargan M, Norris K, et al. The development of a mandatory medical thesis in an urban medical school. Teach Learn Med. 2005;17:363–9.CrossRef
23.
Dyrbye LN, Davidson LW, Cook DA. Publications and presentations resulting from required research by students at Mayo medical School, 1976–2003. Acad Med. 2008;83:604–10.CrossRef
24.
Areephanthu CJ, Bole R, Stratton T, Kelly TH, Starnes CP, Sawaya BP. Impact of professional student mentored research fellowship on medical education and academic medicine career path. Clin Transl Sci. 2015;8:479–83.CrossRef
25.
George P, Green EP, Park YS, Gruppuso PA. A 5‑year experience with an elective scholarly concentrations program. Med Educ Online. 2015;20:29278.CrossRef
26.
Elwood JM, Pearson JCG, Madeley RJ, et al. Research in epidemiology and community health in the medical curriculum: students’ opinions of the Nottingham experience. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1986;40:232–5.CrossRef
27.
Smith FG, Haraysm PH, Mandin H, Lorscheider FL. Development and evaluation of a research project program for medical students at the University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine. Acad Med. 2001;76:189–94.CrossRef
28.
Petersen S. Time for evidence based medical education. BMJ. 1999;318:1223–4.CrossRef
29.
Langhammer CG, Garg K, Neubauer JA, Rosenthal S, Kinzy TG. Medical student research exposure via a series of modular research programs. J Investig Med. 2009;57:11–7.CrossRef
30.
Medeiros LC, Butkus SN, Chipman H, Cox RH, Jones L, Little D. A logic model framework for community nutrition education. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005;37:197–202.CrossRef
31.
WK Kellogg Foundation. Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and action: logic model development guide. Battle Creek: WK Kellogg Foundation; 2004.
32.
Gugiu PC, Rodriguez-Campos L. Semi-structured interview protocol for constructing logic models. Eval Program Plann. 2007;30:339–50.CrossRef
33.
Hatry H. Measuring program outcomes: a practical approach. Alexandria: United Way of America; 1996.
34.
Bordage G. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ. 2009;43:312–9.CrossRef
35.
Harris I. Deliberative inquiry: the arts of planning. In: Short EC, editor. Forms of Curriculum Inquiry. Albany: State University of New York; 1991. pp. 285–307.
36.
Mann KV. Motivation in medical education: how theory can inform our practice. Acad Med. 1999;74:237–9.CrossRef
37.
Cook DA. If you teach them, they will learn: why medical education needs comparative effectiveness research. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012;17:305–10.CrossRef
38.
Ellis P, Baker C, Hanger M. Research on the comparative effectiveness of medical treatments: issues and options for an expanded federal role. Washington: Congressional Budget Office, Congress of the United States; 2007.
Metadata
Title
Scholarly concentration programs and medical student research productivity: a systematic review
Authors
Annika G. Havnaer
Allison J. Chen
Paul B. Greenberg
Publication date
01-08-2017
Publisher
Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Published in
Perspectives on Medical Education / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 2212-2761
Electronic ISSN: 2212-277X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-017-0328-2

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Perspectives on Medical Education 4/2017 Go to the issue

Eye-Opener

Re-positioning faculty development as knowledge mobilization for health professions education

Statistical Points and Pitfalls

The bridge between design and analysis

Original Article

Evaluating the effect of instruction and practice schedule on the acquisition of ECG interpretation skills

Original Article

Am I ready for it? Students’ perceptions of meaningful feedback on entrustable professional activities

Original Article

The relationship between work and home characteristics and work engagement in medical residents

Letter

Saying ‘Thank You’ to those whose thoughts really helped us forward