Effects of Participating in a Research Project During the COVID-19 Pandemic on Medical Students’ Educational Routines and Mental Health: Protocol for a Web-Based Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in social isolation, which has a potential negative impact on the educational routines (eg, the suspension of face-to-face appointments) and mental health of medical students. The Mario Pinotti II (MPII) study is a 24-week observational study that conducted scheduled telephone calls every 2 weeks to verify the occurrence of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases on chronic hydroxychloroquine therapy (from March 29, 2020, to September 30, 2020). The effects of voluntarily participating in a research project (ie, one that involves interactions via telephone contact with patients, professors, rheumatologists, and colleagues) on the daily lives and mental health of medical students requires evaluation. OBJECTIVE: As medical students are professionals in training and have a high level of responsibility in terms of handling the emotional and physical aspects of several diseases, this study aims to evaluate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and participation in the MPII study on the educational routines and mental health of medical students. METHODS: A web-based survey was carried out to perform a cross-sectional comparative assessment of medical students who participated in the MPII study and their colleagues who were not involved in the MPII study. Participants from both groups were matched based on sex, age, and medical school. The web questionnaire was developed by a panel composed of graduate medical students, rheumatologists, medical school professors, and a psychology professor. The questionnaire included details on demographic and life habits data and evaluated participants' impressions of the MPII study and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their educational routines and medical training. In addition, depression, anxiety, and stress were evaluated using the Brazilian version of the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS)-21, and currently, the DASS-21 scores are grouped as those that indicate a low, moderate, or high risk of mental distress. This project was approved by the Federal University of São Paulo Ethics Committee (CAAE: 34034620.0.0000.5505). RESULTS: Data were collected from both medical student groups from July 20 to August 31, 2020. Data extraction was completed in September 2020. The data analysis is ongoing. We expect the results to be published in the first semester of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide insight into the effects of participating in a research project on depression, anxiety, and stress, which will be determined by applying the DASS-21 to a large sample of Brazilian undergraduate medical students. We will also evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students' educational routines and medical training. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24617.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.070 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.009 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".