Medical students’ challenges and suggestions regarding research training: a synthesis of comments from a cross-sectional survey

Background: We previously reported on a cross-sectional study of students from the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University that found most respondents wanted more opportunities to participate in research. Students provided additional comments that we synthesized to enrich the findings of our quantitative analysis.   Methods: From our previously administered 13-item, online questionnaire, run across three campuses in Ontario, Canada, 498 of 618 medical students completed our survey and 360 (72%) provided optional written comments, which we synthesized using thematic analysis in this current study.  Results: Major themes that emerged were: (1) Active student participation to identify research opportunities and interested mentors are needed; (2) Types of research involvement; (3) Uncertainty whether research training translates into useable skills; (4) Desire for a formalized research curriculum and centralization of research opportunities across campuses.  Conclusion: Programs should stress to interested students the importance of actively looking for research opportunities and consider both large and small-group educational sessions

Predictors of medical student interest and confidence in research during training: a cross-sectional study

Purpose: Research education and opportunities are an important part of undergraduate medical education. This study’s objectives were to determine students’ interest in research, student self-rated research skills and to assess potential predictors of research interest and confidence. Method: Stakeholder consultation and literature informed a 13-item cross-sectional survey. In 2014, all students enrolled in McMaster University’s School of Medicine in Ontario, Canada were sent three waves of an electronic survey. Results: The response rate was 81% (498 of 618). Most (n=445, 89%) endorsed prior research experiences. The majority of students (n=383, 86%) wanted more research education and opportunities. Higher rating of their supervisors’ understanding of research was associated with greater interest in research (OR=2.08; 95% CI=1.27–3.41). Home campus (distributed vs. main) was not a significant predictor of research interest. In our adjusted linear regression model, significant predictors of higher self-rated research ability included prior thesis work and higher self-rated knowledge gained in MD program. Conclusions: In a survey of a three-year medical school, medical student interest in further research education and opportunities was high and positively predicted by student-rated supervisors’ understanding of research, but not campus location. This study also identified several predictors of student self-rated research ability