Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Training methods that improve MD–PhD student self-efficacy for clinical research skills

  • Mathew Sebastian (a1) (a2), Matthew A. Robinson (a3), Leanne Dumeny (a2) (a4), Kyle A. Dyson (a1) (a2), Joseph C. Fantone (a5), Wayne T. McCormack (a2) (a5) (a6) and W. Stratford May (a2) (a7)...

Abstract

Introduction:

MD-PhD training programs train physician-scientists to pursue careers involving both clinical care and research, but decreasing numbers of physician-scientists stay engaged in clinical research. We sought to identify current clinical research training methods utilized by MD–PhD programs and to assess how effective they are in promoting self-efficacy for clinical research.

Methods:

The US MD–PhD students were surveyed in April–May 2018. Students identified the clinical research training methods they participated in, and self-efficacy in clinical research was determined using a modified 12-item Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory.

Results:

Responses were received from 61 of 108 MD–PhD institutions. Responses were obtained from 647 MD–PhD students in all years of training. The primary methods of clinical research training included no clinical research training, and various combinations of didactics, mentored clinical research, and a clinical research practicum. Students with didactics plus mentored clinical research had similar self-efficacy as those with didactics plus clinical research practicum. Training activities that differentiated students who did and did not have the clinical research practicum experience and were associated with higher self-efficacy included exposure to Institutional Review Boards and participation in human subject recruitment.

Conclusions:

A clinical research practicum was found to be an effective option for MD–PhD students conducting basic science research to gain experience in clinical research skills. Clinical research self-efficacy was correlated with the amount of clinical research training and specific clinical research tasks, which may inform curriculum development for a variety of clinical and translational research training programs, for example, MD–PhD, TL1, and KL2.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Training methods that improve MD–PhD student self-efficacy for clinical research skills
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Training methods that improve MD–PhD student self-efficacy for clinical research skills
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Training methods that improve MD–PhD student self-efficacy for clinical research skills
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: W. T. McCormack, PhD, Department of Pathology, Immunology & Laboratory Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, 1249 Center Drive, Room CG-72K Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. Email: mccormac@ufl.edu
W. Stratford May, MD, PhD, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, University of Florida College of Medicine, 1600 SW Archer Road, P.O. Box 100278 Gainesville, FL 32610, USA. Email: smay@ufl.edu

References

Hide All
1. National Institute of General Medical Sciences. PAR-19-036: Medical scientist training program (T32) [Internet]. Retrieved from: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/par-19-036.html. Accessed December 4, 2018.
2. Bensken, WP, et al. Future directions of training physician-scientists: reimagining and remeasuring the workforce. Academic Medicine [Internet] 2019; 94(5): 659663. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30640263
3. Ginsburg, D, et al. Physician-scientist workforce working group report [Internet]. 2014. Retrieved from: https://acd.od.nih.gov/documents/reports/PSW_Report_ACD_06042014.pdf. Accessed June 26, 2019.
4. English, RA, Lebovitz, Y, Griffin, RB. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States, National Academies Press. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press, 2010. 17p.
5. Dilts, DM, et al. Development of clinical trials in a cooperative group setting: the eastern cooperative oncology group. Clinical Cancer Research [Internet] 2008; 14(11): 34273433. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18519773
6. Scoglio, D, Fichera, A. Establishing a successful clinical research program. Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery [Internet] 2014; 27(2): 6570. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25067920
7. Mullikin, EA, Bakken, LL, Betz, NE. Assessing research self-efficacy in physician-scientists: The clinical research appraisal inventory. Journal of Career Assessment 2007; 15(3): 367387.
8. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 1977; 84: 191215.
9. Lent, RW, Brown, SD, Hackett, G. Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior 1994; 45: 79122.
10. Phillips, JC, Russell, RK. Research self-efficacy, the research training environment, and research productivity among graduate students in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist [Internet]. 1994; 22(4): 628641. doi:10.1177/0011000094224008
11. Bishop, RM, Bieschke, KJ. Applying social cognitive theory to interest in research among counseling psychology doctoral students: a path analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology [Internet] 1998; 45(2): 182188. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.45.2.182
12. Stajkovic, AD, Luthans, F. Self-efficacy and work-related performance: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin [Internet] 1998; 124(2): 240261. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.240
13. Stone, DN. Overconfidence in initial self-efficacy judgments: effects on decision processes and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes [Internet] 1994; 59(3): 452474. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597884710697
14. Vancouver, JB, et al. Two studies examining the negative effect of self-efficacy on performance. Journal of Applied Psychology [Internet] 2002; 87(3): 506516. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.506
15. Kulasegaram, KM, et al. Cognition before curriculum. Academic Medicine [Internet] 2013; 88(10): 15781585. Retrieved from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00001888-201310000-00042
16. Baghdady, MT, et al. Integration of basic sciences and clinical sciences in oral radiology education for dental students [Internet]. Journal of Dental Education 2013; 757. Retrieved from: http://www.jdentaled.org/content/jde/77/6/757.full.pdf
17. Woods, NN. Science is fundamental: the role of biomedical knowledge in clinical reasoning. Medical Education [Internet]. 2007; 41(12): 11731177. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02911.x
18. Woods, NN, Brooks, LR, Norman, GR. The role of biomedical knowledge in diagnosis of difficult clinical cases. Advances in Health Sciences Education [Internet] 2007; 12(4): 417426. doi:10.1007/s10459-006-9054-y
19. Robinson, GFWB, et al. A shortened version of the clinical research appraisal inventory: CRAI-12. Academic Medicine 2013; 88(9): 13401345.
20. Association of American Medical Colleges. MD-PhD Degree Programs by State [Internet].Retrieved from: https://students-residents.aamc.org/applying-medical-school/article/mdphd-degree-programs-state/. Accessed March 5, 2018.
21. Association of American Medical Colleges. Total MD-PhD Enrollment by U.S. Medical School and Sex, 2013–2014 through 2017–2018 [Internet].Retrieved from: https://www.aamc.org/download/321554/data/factstableb11-2.pdf. Accessed September 17, 2018.
22. Akabas, MH, Tartakovsky, I, Brass, LF. National MD-PhD Program Outcomes Study [Internet]. 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.aamc.org/download/489886/data/nationalmd-phdprogramoutcomesstudy.pdf. Accessed August 16, 2019.
23. Ng, E, et al. The integration of clinical and research training. Academic Medicine [Internet]. 2018; 1. Retrieved from: http://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001888-900000000-97803
24. Stacpoole, PW, et al. Teaching hypothesis-oriented thinking to medical students: the University of Florida’s clinical investigation program. Academic Medicine 2001; 76(3): 287292.
25. Cornfield, DN, et al. Patching the pipeline: creation and retention of the next generation of physician–scientists for child health research. The Journal of Pediatrics [Internet] 2014; 165(5): 882884.e1. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022347614006854?via%3Dihub
26. Daniels, RJ. A generation at risk: young investigators and the future of the biomedical workforce. doi:10.1073/pnas.1418761112. Accessed September 17, 2018.
27. Escobar-Alvarez, SN, Myers, ER. The doris duke clinical scientist development award. Academic Medicine [Internet] 2013; 88(11): 17401746. Retrieved from: http://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001888-201311000-00044
28. Jeffe, DB, et al. Educational outcomes for students enrolled in MD–PhD programs at medical school matriculation, 1995–2000. Academic Medicine [Internet] 2014; 89(1): 8493. Retrieved from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00001888-201401000-00028

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Sebastian et al. supplementary material
Sebastian et al. supplementary material

 Word (21 KB)
21 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed