Investigating the impact of a research-based integrated curriculum on self-perceived research experiences of medical students in community placements: a pre- and post-test analysis of three student cohorts

BMC Medical Education

Peter L McLennan¹  Warren C Rich¹  Kathryn M Weston¹  Judy R Mullan¹ 

[1] Graduate School of Medicine, University of Wollongong, Northfields Ave, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia

关键词: Research projects;    Medical curriculum;    Authentic learning experiences;    Medical students;    Self-perceived research capacity;    Research and critical analysis;   

Others  :  1092090
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-14-161

 received in 2013-08-07, accepted in 2014-07-28,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

To build research capacity among graduating medical students, the teaching of research and critical analysis was integrated into the University of Wollongong (UoW) new, graduate-entry medical curriculum. This study examined whether the self-perceived research experiences of medical students, and consequent research capability, were influenced by exposure to this innovative research and critical analysis curriculum, which incorporated a 12-month community-based research project, and associated assessment tasks.

Methods

The first three medical students cohorts (N = 221) completed a self-assessment of their research experiences in ten areas of research activity. Their responses were collected: before and after they undertook an individual community-based research project within a 12-month regional/rural clinical placement. The research areas investigated by the self-assessment tool were: (i) defining a research question/idea; (ii) writing a research protocol; (iii) finding relevant literature; (iv) critically reviewing the literature; (v) using quantitative research methods; (vi) using qualitative research methods; (vii) analysing and interpreting results; (viii) writing and presenting a research report; (ix) publishing results; and (x) applying for research funding.

Results

Participation rates of 94% (207/221) pre-placement and 99% (219/221) post-placement were achieved from the three student cohorts. Following the successful completion of the research projects and their assessment tasks, the median responses were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in nine of the ten research areas. The only area of research for which there was no increase recorded for any one of the three cohorts, or overall, was (x) applying for research funding. This activity was not a component of the UoW research and critical analysis curriculum and the item was included as a test of internal validity. Significant gains were also seen between cohorts in some key research areas.

Conclusions

Improved research capability among medical students was evidenced by increased scores in various areas of research experience in the context of successful completion of relevant assessment tasks. The results suggest that research capability of medical students can be positively influenced by the provision of a research-based integrated medical curriculum and further consolidated by authentic learning experiences, gained through conducting ‘hands-on’ research projects, under the supervision and mentoring of research-qualified academics.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Mullan et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Ried K, Farmer E, Weston K: Setting directions for capacity building in primary health care: a survey of a research network. BMC Fam Pract 2006, 7:1-11.
• [2]Australian Medical Council: Assessment and Accreditation of Medical Schools: Standards and Procedures. Kingston, ACT: Australian Medical Council Ltd; 2009.
• [3]Albert E, Mickan S: Closing the gap and widening the scope new directions for research capacity building in primary health care. Aust Fam Physician 2003, 31:1038-1041.
• [4]Marshall B, Warren J: Unidentified curved bacilli in the stomach of patients with gastritis and peptic ulceration. Lancet 1984, June 16:1311-1315.
• [5]Green EP, Borkan JM, Pross SH, Adler SR, Nothnagle M, Parsonnet J, Gruppuso PA: Encouraging scholarship: medical school programs to promote student inquiry beyond the traditional medical curriculum. Acad Med 2010, 85:409-418.
• [6]Parsonnet J, Gruppuso PA, Kanter SL, Boninger M: Required vs. elective research and in-depth scholarship programs in the medical school curriculum. Acad Med 2010, 85:405-408.
• [7]Weston KM, Mullan JR, McLennan PL: Building research capacity through community-based projects. Med Educ 2010, 44:496-497.
• [8]Burgoyne LN, O’Flynn S, Boylan GB: Undergraduate medical research: the student perspective. Med Educ Online 2010, 15:5212.
• [9]McLean AL, Saunders C, Velu PP, Iredale J, Hor K, Russell CD: Twelve tips for teachers to encourage student engagement in academic medicine. Med Teach 2013, 35:549-554.
• [10]Millar E, Baker M, Howden-Chapman P, Wilson N, Dickson N: Involving students in real-world research: a pilot study for teaching public health and research skills. BMC Med Educ 2009, 9:45-51.
• [11]Vygotsky L: Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press; 1978.
• [12]Mann K: Theoretical perspectives in medical education: past experience and future possibilities. Med Educ 2011, 40:60-68.
• [13]Smith F, Harasym P, Mandin H, Lorscheider F: Development and evaluation of a research project program for medical students at the University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine. Acad Med 2001, 26:189-194.
• [14]Webster-Wright A: Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Rev Educ Res 2009, 79:702-739.
• [15]Gordon C: Raising active voices in school libraries: authentic learning, information processing and guided inquiry. SCAN 2009, 28:34-41.
• [16]Wiggins G: Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments To Inform And Improve Student Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications; 1998.
• [17]O’Tuathaigh C, Duggan E, Khashan A, Boylan G, O’Flynn S: Selection of student-selected component [SSCs] modules across the medical curriculum: relationship with motivational factors. Med Teach 2012, 34:813-820.
• [18]Torre D, Durning S, Daley B: Twelve tips for teaching with concept maps in medical education. Med Teach 2013, 35:201-208.
• [19]Harden R, Laidlaw J: Be FAIR to students: Four principles that lead to more effective teaching. Med Teach 2013, 35:27-31.
• [20]Griffin MF, Hindocha S: Publication practices of medical students at British medical schools: experience, attitudes and barriers to publish. Med Teach 2011, 33:e1-e8.
• [21]Mileder LP: Medical students and research: is there a current discrepancy between education and demands? GMS Z Med Ausbild 2014, 31:Doc15.
• [22]Smith H, Wright D, Morgan S, Dunleavey J, Moore M: The ‘Research Spider’: a simple method of assessing research experience. Prim Health Care Res and Dev 2002, 3:139-140.
• [23]Harrison L: The Validity Of Self-Reported Drug Use In Survey Research: An Overview And Critique Of Research Methods. In The validity of self-reported drug use: Improving the accuracy of survey estimates National Institute on Drug Abuse. Edited by Harrison L, Hughes A. Washington DC: United States Department of Health and Human Services; 1997:17-36.
• [24]Irby DM, Cooke M, O'Brien BC: Calls for reform of medical education by the Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of teaching: 1910 and 2010. Acad Med 2010, 85:220-227.
• [25]Laidlaw A, Guild S, Struthers J: Graduate attributes in the disciplines of Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine: a survey of expert opinions. BMC Med Educ 2009, 9:28.
• [26]Cooke J: A framework to evaluate research capacity building in health care. BMC Fam Pract 2005, 6:1-11.
• [27]Farmer E, Weston K: A conceptual model for capacity building in Australian primary health care research. Aust Fam Physician 2002, 31:1139-1142.
• [28]Brand D, Patrick P, Grayson M: Mid-career research training for the generalist physician: case study of a balancing act. Teach Learn Med 2008, 20:180-185.
• [29]McIntyre AE, Brun L, Cameron H: Researcher development program of the primary health care research, evaluation and development strategy. Aust J Prim Health 2011, 17:114-121.
• [30]Ried K, Montgomery B, Stocks N, Farmer E: General practice research training: impact of the Australian Registrar Research Workshop on research skills, confidence, interest and involvement of participants, 2002–2006. Fam Prac 2008, 25:119-126.
• [31]North American Primary Care Research Group Committee on Building Research and the Academic Family Medicine Organisation’s Research Sub-Committee: What does it mean to build research capacity? Fam Med 2002, 34:678-684.
• [32]Yardley S, Teunissen P, Dornan T: Experiential learning: transforming theory into practice. Med Teach 2012, 34:161-164.
• [33]Knobloch N: Is experiential learning authentic? J Agri Educ 2003, 44:22-34.
• [34]Strasser R: Rural Health Research: Have we turned the corner? Aust J Rural Health 2000, 8:249-253.
• [35]Ried K, Fuller J: Building a culture of research dissemination in primary health care: the South Australian experience of supporting the novice researcher. Aust Health Rev 2005, 29:6-11.
• [36]Frontera W, Fuhrer M, Jette A, Chan L, Cooper R, Duncan P, Kemp J, Ottenbacher K, Hunter Peckham P, Roth E, Tate D: Rehabilitation medicine summit: building research capacity: executive summary. Am J Occup Ther 2006, 60:165-176.
• [37]Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis P, Van Harrison R, Thorpe KE, Perrier L: Accuracy of Physicians self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence. Syst Rev JAMA 2006, 296:1094-1102.
• [38]Jones R, Mukta P, Desbiens N: Internal medicine residents do not accurately assess their medical knowledge. Adv in Health Sci Educ 2008, 13:463-468.