PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: As research becomes an increasingly important component of medical education, there is greater emphasis on incorporating programmatic enhancements to the research experience. This study builds a logic model to summarize research program inputs, outputs, and outcomes from research-oriented medical schools across the country, providing a framework that institutions can use to design and improve their medical student research training programs.
UNASSIGNED: Between November 2021 and February 2022, we administered a survey assessing institutional characteristics, research offerings, curriculum, funding, and student scholarly products to the medical schools ranked 1-50 in research in 2021 by US News and World Report. Results were compiled in the form of a logic model.
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-seven institutions (72.5%) responded. Common program inputs included personnel such as at least one funded program director (97.3%), while funding for medical student research activities was highly variable (8-72%). There was much less funding for faculty research mentors (2.7%), advisors (18.9%), and teaching faculty (29.7%). Common outputs included a medical student research office or program (97.3%), formal research curricula (83.8%), and services and programs such as research day (91.9%). The most common outcomes tracked were publications (48.6%), presentations/posters (43.2%), student participation (29.7%), and completion of a research requirement (29.7%).
UNASSIGNED: Common themes in medical student research training programs may be conceptualized with a logic model that schools can use to develop, evaluate, and iteratively improve their programs. Institutions should consider their desired program outcomes prior to designing inputs (e.g., funding, personnel) and outputs (e.g., curriculum, training).
UNASSIGNED: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02001-3.
UNASSIGNED: Between November 2021 and February 2022, we administered a survey assessing institutional characteristics, research offerings, curriculum, funding, and student scholarly products to the medical schools ranked 1-50 in research in 2021 by US News and World Report. Results were compiled in the form of a logic model.
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-seven institutions (72.5%) responded. Common program inputs included personnel such as at least one funded program director (97.3%), while funding for medical student research activities was highly variable (8-72%). There was much less funding for faculty research mentors (2.7%), advisors (18.9%), and teaching faculty (29.7%). Common outputs included a medical student research office or program (97.3%), formal research curricula (83.8%), and services and programs such as research day (91.9%). The most common outcomes tracked were publications (48.6%), presentations/posters (43.2%), student participation (29.7%), and completion of a research requirement (29.7%).
UNASSIGNED: Common themes in medical student research training programs may be conceptualized with a logic model that schools can use to develop, evaluate, and iteratively improve their programs. Institutions should consider their desired program outcomes prior to designing inputs (e.g., funding, personnel) and outputs (e.g., curriculum, training).
UNASSIGNED: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02001-3.
摘要：
■随着研究成为医学教育中越来越重要的组成部分，更加强调将方案增强纳入研究经验。本研究建立了一个逻辑模型来总结研究项目输入，输出，以及全国研究型医学院的成果，提供机构可以用来设计和改进他们的医学生研究培训计划的框架。
■在2021年11月至2022年2月之间，我们进行了一项评估机构特征的调查，研究产品，课程,资金,根据《美国新闻与世界报道》，2021年医学院的学生学术产品在研究中排名1-50。结果以逻辑模型的形式进行编译。
■37家机构（72.5%）做出了回应。共同的项目投入包括至少一名资助项目主管(97.3%)等人员，而医学生研究活动的资金变化很大（8-72％）。教师研究导师的资金少得多(2.7%)，顾问（18.9%），和教学教师(29.7%)。共同产出包括医学生研究办公室或项目(97.3%)，正式研究课程(83.8%)，以及研究日等服务和计划（91.9%）。最常见的结果是出版物（48.6％），演示文稿/海报(43.2%)，学生参与(29.7%)，并完成研究要求(29.7%)。
■医学生研究培训计划中的常见主题可以用学校可以用来开发的逻辑模型概念化，评估，并反复改进他们的程序。机构在设计投入之前应考虑其期望的计划成果(例如，资金,人员)和产出(例如，课程,培训)。
■在线版本包含补充材料，可在10.1007/s40670-024-02001-3获得。
■在2021年11月至2022年2月之间，我们进行了一项评估机构特征的调查，研究产品，课程,资金,根据《美国新闻与世界报道》，2021年医学院的学生学术产品在研究中排名1-50。结果以逻辑模型的形式进行编译。
■37家机构（72.5%）做出了回应。共同的项目投入包括至少一名资助项目主管(97.3%)等人员，而医学生研究活动的资金变化很大（8-72％）。教师研究导师的资金少得多(2.7%)，顾问（18.9%），和教学教师(29.7%)。共同产出包括医学生研究办公室或项目(97.3%)，正式研究课程(83.8%)，以及研究日等服务和计划（91.9%）。最常见的结果是出版物（48.6％），演示文稿/海报(43.2%)，学生参与(29.7%)，并完成研究要求(29.7%)。
■医学生研究培训计划中的常见主题可以用学校可以用来开发的逻辑模型概念化，评估，并反复改进他们的程序。机构在设计投入之前应考虑其期望的计划成果(例如，资金,人员)和产出(例如，课程,培训)。
■在线版本包含补充材料，可在10.1007/s40670-024-02001-3获得。
