Gender Differences in Attitude and Barriers to Research by Medical Undergraduate Students in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Medical research, one of the pillars of medical education plays a crucial impact in advancing healthcare by improving the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of illnesses. It is important to ensure that medical students and early career physicians are involved to research outside the curriculum at an early stage of training. This early involvement has been widely known to increase one’s likelihood of building a career in research. In Nigeria, the gender composition of research personnel in universities is alarming as less than a quarter are female. There is a need to describe the factors responsible for this imbalance in order to inform stakeholders on where actionable measures can be taken. Aim To examine the gender differences in the attitude towards research, willingness to undertake research, and barriers to research reported by undergraduate clinical students in Nigeria. Methods Six hundred and seventy-two (672) undergraduate medical students in their fourth to sixth years of study in seven selected medical schools across Nigeria completed an electronic survey in August 2022. The survey which was hosted on REDCap was adapted from published works which addressed a similar scope and comprised of 56 items divided into five sections. Gender differences in research experience, willingness to participate in research, attitude towards research and barriers that hinder participation in research were explored using a chi-square test. Variables were collected using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to agree with a “neutral midpoint” and SPSS version 25 was used in the analysis. Results Although an equal proportion of male and female students reported voluntary involvement in research, 56.2% of male students and 28.8% of female students perceived research as exciting and enjoyable (p<0.001) and 37.5% of male students vs 47.0 of female students perceived research as being complicated. Male students were more willing to spend more than 3 months on a research project (56.0% vs 42.5%, p<0.001), devote as much time to research as to medical studies (40.1% vs 28%, p=0.002), and to pursue a research-oriented career in the future (49.3% vs 32%, p<0.001). Overall, male students reported a higher number of barriers than female students. However, lack of personal interest in research (19.2% vs 26.9%, male vs female students, p=0.011) and insufficient training in research methodology (70.1% vs 81.7%, male vs female students, p=0.009) were reported more by female students. Conclusion Although there are no gender differences in the composition of students who report prior voluntarily involvement in research, there are gender differences in the attitude and willingness as well as barriers encountered by clinical students to carry out research. Tailored measures should be developed around the peculiar barriers expressed by female medical students.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".