Project description:The popularity and effectiveness of intensive summer research programs to increase student self-efficacy is known. The Summer Research Institute (SRI) training experience, as part of undergraduate student training in Morgan State University's NIH BUILD program, uses an entrepreneurial approach to prepare students for careers in health-related research. Bandura's self-efficacy theory's (1977) four antecedents are represented in the SRI curriculum, which provides multiple opportunities for mastery experiences and for moments of roused feelings. These occurrences are accompanied by extensive multilayered mentoring, where the mentors provide verbal encouragement, and facilitate various modes of academic, psychosocial and institutional support. To our knowledge, student affect over time has not been tested to assess impact or program effectiveness in a summer research training program. This study is based on the qualitative assessment of bi-weekly journals of 28 students in the SRI. The practice of students consistently writing journals is aligned with the scaffolded knowledge integration framework proposed by Linn (1995). The journals were reviewed for their cumulative affective content and change over time. The students responded as expected with positive and negative affect throughout the program and ended with overwhelmingly positive affect with their concluding presentations. Using Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC), a text analysis program, we matched the fluctuations in affect to activities during the program and interpreted the changes for program assessment. This type of analysis opens a window into student affective responses to training components that, to our knowledge, have not been widely used for research training programs of this kind.
Project description:Research experience garnered through summer student programs (SSPs) is critical for high school and college student retention in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines. However, the global coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic prevented in-person SSPs in 2020, eliminating these essential experiences that students need to advance their STEM training. In response, we created a remote-learning model that can be broadly adapted for other SSPs. We aimed to uphold our traditional SSP's academic rigor by cultivating critical thinking skills, providing mentorship, and equipping students with tools to serve as public health ambassadors in their communities. We designed the remote SSP around an anchor topic to integrate didactic lectures with research-based independent projects. Program success was evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively via content assessments and written feedback. By comparing preassessments to postassessments, we show that students gained general scientific literacy and improved critical thinking skills. Based on qualitative measures, students were satisfied with their mentorship, reported that they would use what they learned through the SSP in the future, indicated that they had the tools to understand and communicate public health information, and, overall, rated the quality of the SSP positively. As the pandemic continues to necessitate remote learning, traditional in-person experiences will need to be adapted to best support students. We have developed a modular and adaptable SSP that upholds the same standards as the traditional SSP by continuing to provide essential experiences necessary to advance students' training in STEM.
Project description:Increasing the participation of students of African descent and other minoritized populations in the scientific workforce is imperative in generating a more equitable biomedical research infrastructure and increasing national research creativity and productivity. Undergraduate research training programs have shown to be essential tools in retaining underrepresented minority (URM) students in the sciences and attracting them into STEM and biomedical careers. This paper describes an innovative approach to harness students' entrepreneurial desire for autonomy and creativity in a Summer Research Institute (SRI) that has served as an entry point into a multiyear, National Institutes of Health Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (NIH BUILD)-funded research training program. The SRI was designed as an 8-week, student-centered and course-based research model in which students select their own research topics. We test here the effects of SRI training on students' science self-efficacy and science identity, along with several other constructs often associated with academic outcomes in the sciences. The data shown here comprise analysis of four different training cohorts throughout four subsequent summers. We show significant gains in students' science self-efficacy and science identity at the conclusion of SRI training, as well as academic adjustment and sense of belonging. SRI participants also displayed substantially improved retention in their science majors and graduation rates.
Project description:Over the last decades there has been a decline in the recruitment of medical students into academia in all medical fields. Concurrently, medical research has increasingly included other disciplines in multidisciplinary convergence, introducing an unmet recruitment gap and requirement for medical researchers. To counteract the trend and recruit students to academic medicine, a national intercalated Medical Student Research Program (MSRP) was established in Norway in 2002. A preliminary evaluation in 2009 suggested that the MSRP had resulted in recruitment, but could not conclude on a lasting effect beyond graduation in a study that did not include any controls. These results led us to hypothesize that the MSRP could increase the number of PhD degrees and attract medical students towards academic medicine. Adopting a case cohort design, we here report that the intercalated MSRP had a significant impact of the throughput of physician-scientists to PhD, by increasing the rate of PhD completion 10-fold (p<0.001). Moreover, almost twice as many MSRP physicians reported an academic aspiration (49% vs 22%, p<0.001). Results suggested that an MSRP-like approach could efficiently address the unmet recruitment gap and strengthen the medical disciplines in medical research.
Project description:BackgroundPrior to the COVID-19 pandemic, medical students exhibited poorer mental health relative to the general population and other students. This research aimed to assess American medical student mental health during the pandemic's height, while also identifying stressors and vulnerable populations.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, 960 US allopathic and osteopathic medical students completed a mental health survey screening for depression, anxiety, burnout, suicidal ideation and increased substance use during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Potential relationships were explored between these mental health indicators and demographic and environmental factors, such as COVID-19 exposure.FindingsOf the 960 medical students surveyed, 25.1% (n = 241) screened positive for depression, 40.4% (n = 388) screened positive for anxiety, 21.3% (n = 201) met criteria for at least one dimension of burnout, 19.0% (n = 182) started or increased substance use and 7.2% (n = 69) experienced thoughts of self-harm or suicide. Significant differences (p ≤ 0.01) in measures of mental health were associated with those who had accessed mental health care, had a personal COVID-19 diagnosis, knew someone who died of COVID-19 or were female.ConclusionsAlthough rates of anxiety and substance use among medical students in our study were higher than previously reported, rates of burnout and thoughts of self-harm or suicide were surprisingly lower. These results indicate that some aspects of remote learning imposed by the pandemic could be protective, warranting additional study for post-pandemic medical education. Meanwhile, medical schools and clerkships should offer additional resources to students particularly vulnerable to stressors, including females and those with personal pandemic impacts.
Project description:Objectives Developing a preclinical training infrastructure for cardiovascular clinician-scientists is an academic workforce priority. The Cardiovascular Research Institute of Vermont developed a cardiovascular summer research fellowship (SRF), wherein medical student awardees were selected by merit-based application and completed mentored research between the first and second years. We aimed to study the impact of the SRF on medical student scholarship and career planning. Design Retrospective survey study. Setting Single academic medical centre. Participants All SRF participants from 2015 to 2020. Interventions Not applicable. Primary and secondary outcome measures Prior SRF participants were surveyed to ascertain current position, research engagement and perspectives regarding SRF experience. Comparisons to American Association of Medical Colleges Graduation Questionnaire data from equivalent years were made using χ2 tests. Results Survey response rate was 87% (20/23), 55% were women. Median time from SRF completion was 2 years (IQR 0.75–2.25), with 75% still enrolled in medical school and 25% in residency. As a result of the first-year summer programme, 45% published a peer-reviewed abstract or manuscript, which was equivalent to the national rate for graduating students (53%, p=0.4). Most respondents (80%) were active in additional research projects during school separate from the SRF, 90% anticipated a career involving research (vs 53% nationally, p<0.001) and 75% planned to pursue a career in cardiovascular medicine. Conclusion Medical students completing a mentored cardiovascular SRF after their first year have a high rate of academic scholarship, with publication rate already equivalent to national peer graduates. Preclinical SRF students strongly anticipate cardiovascular medicine and research careers.
Project description:Arkansas has a high cancer burden, and a pressing need exists for more medical students to pursue oncology as a career. The Partnership in Cancer Research (PCAR) program provides a summer research experience at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences for 12 medical students who have completed their first year of medical training. A majority of participants spend time pursuing cancer research in basic science, clinical, or community-based research. Students report on their research progress in an interactive "Live from the Lab!" series and assemble a final poster presentation describing their findings. Other activities include participation in a moderated, cancer-patient support group online, lecture series on cancer topics, medical simulations, palliative care clinic visit, "Death Over Dinner" event, and an entrepreneurship competition. Students completed surveys over PCAR's first 2 years in operation to evaluate all aspects of the program. Surveys reveal that students enthusiastically embraced the program in its entirety. This was especially true of the medical simulations which received the highest evaluations. Most significantly, surveys revealed that the program increased cancer knowledge and participant confidence to perform cancer research.
Project description:BackgroundUndergraduate medical education was severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. As traditional clinical rotations were suspended, medical students quickly began alternative, novel educational experiences. Third-year medical students at an academic medical center were given the opportunity to join inpatient eConsult teams within the department of medicine. This study describes the development and implementation of this program as well as the experiences of student and faculty participants.MethodsStudent eConsult participation was rapidly developed and implemented within medical subspecialty teams in either infectious diseases (ID) or nephrology. Twelve third-year medical students and 15 subspecialty attendings participated in this program during an eight-week period from April 6 through May 29, 2020. Breadth of student clinical experience was assessed via review of clinical documentation and surveys. Participating students and attending physicians completed surveys to reflect upon their impressions of the program. Surveys were returned by nine students and eight faculty members. Survey responses were summarized with descriptive statistics.ResultsOver an eight-week period, student consultants wrote 126 notes on 100 patients; 74 of these patients (74%) were hospitalized with COVID-19. Student experiences were largely positive with most strongly agreeing that attendings promoted interactive and engaged learning (N = 8 of 8, 100%), that the experience helped to expand their knowledge about consultant roles (N = 6, 75%), and that they would participate in a remote eConsult program again if given the opportunity (N = 6, 75%). Faculty also were largely positive about the experience with most agreeing or strongly agreeing with the importance of teaching medical students about telehealth (N = 7 of 8, 88%) and eConsults (N = 6, 75%). In narrative responses, students and faculty agreed that teaching was a strength of the program whereas lack of in-person contact was a challenge.ConclusionsRapid development of an inpatient eConsult-based educational experience for third-year medical students was feasible and successful. Student-consultants saw a range of pathology including COVID-19 and related complications. Students were satisfied with the program. They were able to develop a strong relationship with attendings while learning about the role of a consultant. Faculty agreed with the importance of teaching students about telehealth and eConsults specifically.
Project description:This issue of Current Medical Research (CMR) includes studies that provide evidence that use of natural family planning (NFP) can be helpful for subfertile couples wishing to achieve a pregnancy, the effectiveness of a method of NFP during breastfeeding, and the effects of using NFP on marital relationships. This review also includes evidence on predicting the sex of a baby by timing intercourse, evidence that brain injuries can be reflected in changes in the menstrual cycle, and that women prefer methods of family planning that have no side effects. The issue ends with an in-depth review of new technologies that aid in the use of NFP. Topics covered include subfertile couples, breastfeeding, marriage, predicting the sex of a baby, brain injuries, and new technologies.