Motivating Factors of and Perceived Barriers to Research at a Canadian Medical University with Regional Campuses: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Research training programs are an integral part of a well-rounded medical education. These programs help students contribute to medical knowledge, develop skills in critical evaluation and research dissemination, and they facilitate the training of our future medical researchers. Existing literature suggests barriers including lack of available time and access to projects may hinder a medical student’s research training. These barriers likely differ based on the medical school curriculum, and there exists limited data looking at these attitudes in Canadian students, students outside large academic centers or those in condensed programs. Given this, our study aims to further explore medical students' perceptions, perceived barriers of research in a three-year Canadian undergraduate medical school with regional campuses. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students (classes of 2019, 2020 and 2021) representing the main and regional campuses of the Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine in Ontario, Canada to explore their attitudes towards research. Descriptive statistics were used to describe participant demographics, research background and attitudes towards research. Results Overall, 70.4% of students identified as being involved in a research project at some point during their medical school tenure. Motivating factors for research participation included the goal of obtaining a residency spot (63.0%), and interest in their research topic (74.7%). Barriers to research included perceived lack of available time (31.5%), and difficulty in finding a research project (44.5%). Perceived curriculum deficiencies included lack of education in research methodology and appraisal of scientific literature (93.2% and 89.0%, respectively). Lastly, regional campuses tended conduct their research outside of their home campus (43.6% vs 3.3%, p<0.0001). Conclusion The findings from our study highlighted the students’ attitudes towards research in a Canadian medical school that has multiple campuses and a shortened medical curriculum (3-year). It identifies potential areas of improvement from a student perspective, which can hopefully be utilized by medical educators to continue the improvement of medical trainee research training.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,223 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».