What Do Medical Students Understand By Research And Research Skills? Identifying Research Opportunities Within Undergraduate Projects

Figures & data

Table

Practice points

Students and academic staff have different perceptions of what constitutes research and the research skills that will be acquired from specific projects. To fully benefit from research opportunities and develop essential skills, undergraduate students must be given training in ‘what research is’ and project descriptors should be explicit about the research skill development opportunities provided. Medical students should engage with research from the initial stages of their undergraduate education, and medical educators must facilitate significant student engagement with research and associated skills.

Figure 1. Research Methodology.

Table 1.  Purposes common to research skill development within SSC programmes.

Purposes common to all SSC programmes: the programme will provide the opportunity to:	Learning outcomes: It is expected that the student will be able to:	Key tasks: the student will:	Demonstrated by (for example)
Apply & develop research skills in relation to:
(a) Research methods	(ai) Formulate research questions	Write a research question	Presenting the research question clearly in report
	(aii) Demonstrate the ability to identify, select & apply appropriate methods when conducting a research study	Employ appropriate research methods	Defend the rationale of selected methods in report
			Describing fully the methods in report
	(aiii) Recognise the limitations of the research	Describe strengths & weaknesses of research study	Identifying the limitations of study design & outcome of own research in report
	(aiv) Develop an academic argument	Discuss rationale for the study Integrate evidence from “literature” & new evidence from research study	Discussing the research study in report to an appropriate standard
		Discuss the outcome & implications for the study	Describing how work contributes to advance of knowledge
			Producing work of a publishable quality
			Recording discussions with supervisor in reflective log
	(av) Develop an awareness & understanding of the ethical aspects of research	Consider ethical dimensions of research
		Submit research proposal to ethics committee if necessary	Documenting consideration of ethical aspects including method of obtaining consent
		Recognise & acknowledge collaborators	Completing ethics proposal form & relevant documentation
			Complying with local research governance
			Acknowledging the degree of contribution of others in report
(b) Information gathering	(bi) Identify & utilise a wide range of sources of information	Undertake a focussed literature search, which includes paper-based resources, selective use of databases & www sources	Selecting appropriate references in report/essay Discussion in reflective log
	(bii) Acknowledge all sources of information	Consult with informed sources	Appropriate referencing within report/essay
(c) Critical Analysis & Review	(ci) Undertake critical reviews of research papers	Identify appropriate references & bibliography
		Demonstrate critical review, evaluation & interpretation of research evidence	Completing critical, reviews of research papers
(d) Data processing	(di) Use appropriate analysis tools	Critically evaluate own research	Providing critical discussion of own research study
			Describing the analysis method in report
	(dii) Undertake analysis & present statistical information	Demonstrate the use of appropriate tools for analysing research data	Presenting the results in a report
		Effectively present numeric & statistical information

Reproduced with Permission from “Student-selected components in the undergraduate medical curriculum: a multi-institutional consensus on assessable key tasks”. Authors: Patsy Stark; John Ellershaw; David Newble; Mark Perry; Louise Robinson; John Smith; Sue Whittle; Deborah Murdoch-Eaton. Medical Teacher, Vol. 27, No. 8, 2005, pages 720–725. (4)

Table 2.  Agreed criteria to identify if research skills area development within content of projects offered

Project Description	Research skills area identified (from Table 1, Stark et al. 2005, 4)
1. if the word “research” is stated in the project description	Evaluate the project description to determine which skills are likely to be developed e.g. is there collection of new data? All 4 criteria are identified if the project context indicates that opportunities for all 4 research skill areas to be covered
2. if the word “audit” is stated in the project description	Assume that skills areas that will be covered are 3b) information gathering (consult with informed sources) and 3d) data processing (undertake analysis and present statistical information)
3. if the word “audit” is stated in the project description, but there is further information in the description that indicates that the student will only be collecting data, not undertaking any information gathering and consultation with informed sources	Only 3d) data processing (undertake analysis and present statistical information)skill area to be identified
4. project description clearly states that the student will be interpreting and critically evaluating data collected during the project, or the literature searching / information gathering involves critique and interpretation of research evidence	3c) critical analysis and review identified
5. literature review only i.e. not explicitly stated that students do more with the data collected	3b) information gathering is the skill area identified
6. description limited with insufficient detail to determine likely content of project	Classify as undetermined (i.e. not yes or no) for the skills areas

Figure 2. Project content analysis: distribution of research skill areas identified in documentary analysis by research team.

Figure 3. Project content analysis: Number of research skills areas identified within projects.

Stark P, Ellershaw J, Newble D, Perry M, Robinson L, Smith J, Whittle S, Murdoch Eaton D. Student-Selected Components In The Undergraduate Medical Curriculum: A Multi-Institutional Consensus On Assessable Key Tasks. Med Teac 27 2005, 8: 720–725

 Google Scholar