Enhancing the physician-scientist workforce: evaluating a mentored research program for medical students' research competencies and intentions.

Background: The growing recognition of the need to incorporate scientific discoveries into healthcare decisions underscores an urgency for a robust physician-scientist workforce to advance translational research. Despite the correlation between medical students' research engagement and their academic productivity and success, significant gaps remain in the scientific workforce exacerbated by the "leaky pipeline" phenomenon from medical school to academic medicine, where potential physician-scientists veer away from research careers.The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a structured mentored research program for enhancing medical students' research competencies and sustaining their interest in research careers, thereby potentially enhancing the physician-scientist workforce. Methods: The Medical Student Research Program (MSRP) implemented at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) was designed to provide comprehensive research training and support to medical students through a series of structured lectures, mentorship by dedicated faculty, and administrative support for research activities. Students were surveyed upon enrollment and one year later to assess the change in research competencies from baseline to follow-up (paired samples t-test), students' intent to use research in clinical practice (paired samples t-test), and their intent to conduct research in the future (McNemar's test and McNemar Bowker test). Results: Preliminary evaluations indicated that the MSRP enhanced students' research competencies and has the potential to enhance medical students' research skills. However, similar to national trends, there was a decrease in students' intentions to engage with research in their future clinical career. Conclusions: Our preliminary findings demonstrate MSRP students' enhanced research competencies during the first year of the program. However, the decline in students' intentions to engage in future research highlights the need for continued innovation in research training programs to sustain future intent to conduct research, in turn helping to address the "leaky pipeline" in the physician-scientist workforce. Future studies should focus on mid and long-term outcomes to fully assess research program impact on the physician-scientist pipeline and on integrating such programs more broadly into medical education.

Learning to Learn Independently: Guiding Students to Develop Self-Directed Learning Skills During Medical Student Independent Research Projects-Findings from an Australian University.

Introduction: Most medical schools offer students the opportunity to conduct independent research projects in order to learn about evidence-based medicine. This study aimed to explore the experience of students, graduates, and supervisors during an independent research project through the lens of self-directed learning. Methods: Students and recent graduates were asked to complete an anonymous survey about their experiences. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with a purposeful sample of 11 students, 14 graduates, and 25 supervisors. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted and themes were refined through the lens of self-directed learning. Results: Most participants agreed that the independent research project could enable students to develop valuable self-directed learning skills. Participants commented on the importance of the research mentor, faculty support structures, and membership of a research team. Participants who were not well supported described feeling distressed and isolated. Discussion: Medical student involvement in independent research projects can develop self-directed learning skills in the presence of a one-to-one mentoring relationship with a research supervisor, structured guidelines and support from the faculty, and membership of a research team. The development of self-directed learning skills should be part of the learning outcomes of any independent student research project. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02054-4.

Student Perspectives on the Undergraduate Medical Student Research Experience at a Single United States Allopathic Institution.

Introduction The purpose of this study was to identify student-reported institutional facilitators and barriers to successful research experiences at a single United States allopathic institution. Residency applications have increasingly become more competitive, and with the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 exam's transition to pass/fail, factors such as research experience and outcomes may become more important to increase residency application competitiveness. This study sought to explore factors that impact successful research experiences leading to tangible outcomes for medical students at our medical school, the Joe R. & Teresa Lozano Long School of Medicine. Methods  A cross-sectional survey was developed and administered via REDCap to 853 students in May 2022. Survey question domains included demographics, past and present research participation, perceived barriers/facilitators to research, tangible outcomes (e.g., publications and posters), and overall satisfaction with research comparing subjectively "best" and "worst" experiences. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) deemed this project as non-regulated research.  Results We had a 24% (n = 204/853) response rate. The responses were distributed equally among the four classes. A big portion of the participants (71%, n = 59/83) identified a tangible outcome as the most important measure of success. Regarding facilitators, students identified having a mentor (89%, n = 165/184) and departmental connections (85%, n = 156/184) as the most important when looking for a project. Barriers included SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound) lacking in 31% (n = 24/75) of worst projects, followed by a clear timeline in 29% (n = 22/76) and hours of commitment in 27% (n = 21/78). The best projects were more likely to have resulted in a publication (61% (27/44) vs. 32% (14/44)) or have a poster (64% (28/44) vs. 36% (16/44)). Conclusions Medical students are interested in participating in research, with important facilitators including mentorship and departmental connections. Modifiable variables include lack of clear timelines, well-defined roles and responsibilities, and time commitments. This information may be useful for faculty who mentor medical students or medical schools interested in designing medical student research programs.

Developing a framework for promoting interest and engagement of scholarship of teaching and learning for medical students.

BACKGROUND: The scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) is a field of academic research that focuses on improving learning through reflective and informed teaching. Currently, most SoTL-related work is faculty-driven; however, student involvement in SoTL has been shown to benefit both learners and educators. Our study aims to develop a framework for increasing medical students' interest, confidence, and engagement in SoTL. METHODS: A student-led SoTL interest group was developed and a year-round program of SoTL was designed and delivered by student leaders of the group under the guidance of a faculty advisor. Individual post-session surveys were administered to evaluate participants' perceptions of each session. Pre- and post-program surveys were administered to evaluate the program impact. RESULTS: The year-round SoTL program consistently attracted the participation of medical students and faculty. Survey responses indicated strong medical student interest in the program and positive impact of the program. Increased interest and confidence in medical education research were reported by the student participants. The program design provided opportunities for student participants to network and receive ongoing feedback about medical education research they were interested or involved in. CONCLUSION: Our study provides insights for developing a framework that other institutions can reference and build upon to educate and engage students in SoTL.

Medical Students as Educators: Addressing Teaching Skills Through a Pre-clerkship Development Group.

In medicine, effective teaching is requisite for both successful patient care and trainee development. However, opportunities for medical students to gain exposure to pedagogical principles and hone teaching skills are currently limited. Our initiative provides avenues for medical students to intentionally develop their teaching skill set from an early stage.

Evaluating the Impact of a Medical School Student-Run Research Organization on Scholarly Activity.

Introduction The United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 change to Pass/Fail scoring has motivated medical students to pursue more research opportunities. To support students, a student-led organization was created at an allopathic medical school, offering initiatives such as workshops, mentorship, and research projects. Here, we evaluate its impact on medical student research. Methods An observational survey study was conducted to assess students' research involvement and productivity and their sense of support, confidence, and comfort in pursuing research at an institution during the first two years of medical school. These variables were compared between three contiguous classes of students and between club members and non-members. Analyses included t-tests, Chi-square tests, and ANOVA, among others. Results Findings revealed that organization membership was associated with an increased number of research projects. Club members (M= 4.49) reported a significantly greater number of projects compared to non-members (M= 4.49) (p= 0.002). Students who had access to the organization during their preclinical years (M= 4.38) reported significantly more projects compared to students whose preclinical years were before the organization's conception (M= 2.21) (p= 0.041). However, research productivity and feelings of support and confidence in research did not differ by class or club membership.  Conclusions Club members engaged in a greater number of research projects as compared to non-members and students who had access to the organization during their preclinical years. The implementation of similar organizations at every medical school can allow more students to engage in scholarly work.

The association of a scholarly concentrations program with medical students' matched residencies.

PURPOSE: Many medical school curricula include Scholarly Concentrations (SC) programs. While studies have examined how these programs affect students' future research involvement, the association of SC programs with students' specialty choices is uncertain. This study examines the SC program factors associated with congruence between the specialty focus of students' SC projects and the clinical specialty they matched into for residency. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of all students participating in the SC program at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine for graduating classes 2013-2020. They used data from program questionnaires to categorize students' specialty interests (baseline) and SC program experiences (post-program). The authors categorized each student's project into specialties according to their faculty mentors' primary appointments, abstracted student publications from SCOPUS, and abstracted residency program rankings from Doximity Residency Navigator. The authors used multivariable logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for specialty-congruent matching (same specialty as SC project) and for matching into a Doximity-ranked top 20 or top 10 program. RESULTS: Overall, 35.3% of the 771 students matched into the same specialty as their SC projects. Increased odds of specialty-congruent matching occurred with 'definite' interest in the specialty at baseline [aOR (95% CI): 1.76 (0.98-3.15)] (P = 0.06) and with increasing publications with SC mentors [aOR (95% CI): 1.16 (1.03-1.30)] (P = 0.01). Congruence between SC specialty focus and matched specialty conferred no significant difference in odds of matching to a Doximity-ranked top 20 or top 10 program. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline certainty of specialty interest and research productivity were associated with specialty congruence. However, as completing an SC project in a given specialty was not associated with increased odds of matching into that specialty nor into a higher Doximity-ranked program, SC program directors should advise students to pursue SC projects in any topic of personal interest.

Medical student otolaryngology research: Involvement, perceptions, motivations.

OBJECTIVE: Otolaryngology is a competitive specialty that emphasizes research. This study explored medical student involvement in otolaryngology research including training, productivity, perceptions and career goals. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. METHODS: A 27 question multiple choice survey was generated using Qualtrics and posted on an otolaryngology forum (Otomatch) from 10/09/2022 to 12/11/2022. RESULTS: Thirty fourth year medical students (MS4) applying to U.S. otolaryngology residency programs responded. Nearly all (26/30 = 86.7 %) believe there should be dedicated time to research in medical school. MS4 produced an average of 3.23 otolaryngology papers (± 3.13), 5.23 poster presentations (± 9.22) and 2.50 oral presentations (± 5.06). MS4 feel it is more important for physicians to read (mean 4.47 on a 5-point scale; ± 0.76) than to conduct research (3.03 ± 0.87) or to emphasize it in evaluating residency applicants (2.79 ± 0.96). Seventeen respondents (17/30 = 56.7 %) lack interest in continuing research after medical school. Twenty-eight MS4 were evenly split (14/30 = 46.7 %) between a research-heavy or traditional residency. Students felt pressure to publish in low-impact journals (3.93 ± 0.94) for career advancement. CONCLUSION: All respondents were involved in research yet the majority (16/30 = 53.3 %) eschew a research-heavy residency. Using research to evaluate success entices involvement for some who may not be interested. Pressure to publish may exacerbate ethical issues like inaccurately assigned authorship and deceptive reporting of publications. A decreased emphasis on research will enable students truly interested to continue without pressure to publish, leading to a potential increase in generalizable studies.

Barriers to research opportunities among osteopathic medical students.

CONTEXT: Despite the increase of importance placed on research, both by residency program directors and the medical field at large, osteopathic medical students (OMS) have significantly fewer research experiences than United States (U.S.) allopathic medical students and non-U.S. international medical graduates. However, few studies have addressed this long-standing discrepancy, and none directly have focused on osteopathic medical students to assess their unique needs. The literature would benefit from identifying the barriers osteopathic medical students encounter when participating in research and understanding the currently available resources. OBJECTIVES: To assess the barriers that OMS face when seeking research opportunities, identify resources currently available to osteopathic medical students at their respective schools, and investigate factors that contribute to an osteopathic medical student's desire to pursue research opportunities. Additionally, to investigate osteopathic medical students' confidence in research methodology. METHODS: A survey was created by the investigators and administered to participants over a three-month period via a GoogleForm. Research participants were surveyed for demographic information, as well as their involvement in research projects in the past, mentor availability, institutional resources, motivation to participate in research, individual barriers to participation, and confidence in their ability to do independent research. Responses were de-identified and analyzed using Microsoft Excel functions to count data and calculate percentages, as well as Pearson's chi square analysis. RESULTS: After relevant exclusion, 668 responses were included. Of the students surveyed, 85.9% (574) indicated they currently and/or in the past were involved in research. More than half of the respondents that are not currently involved in research are interested in pursuing it (86.9%; 344). The primary barriers students reported facing include lack of time (57.8%; 386), feeling overwhelmed and unsure how to start (53.4%; 357), and lack of access to research (53%; 354). 34.7% (232) of students stated they either did not have resources from their school or were unsure whether these resources were available. The two most cited motivations to pursue research included boosting their residency application and/or interest in the area of study. Male gender and current research were associated with reported confidence in research ( [4, n=662]=10.6, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study provide a synopsis of the barriers to research opportunities among osteopathic medical students. Notably, ⅓ of OMSs reported an absence or unawareness of available research resources at their osteopathic medical schools.

Medical student research opportunities: a survey of osteopathic medical schools in the United States.

CONTEXT: It is important for colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) to provide opportunities for osteopathic medical students (OMSs) to conduct research under the guidance of professional researchers. However, COMs historically lag behind allopathic medical schools in research offerings for medical students. The literature would benefit from a synopsis of research opportunities for OMSs at COMs. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the availability of research opportunities currently offered to OMSs and to identify structured research programs (SRPs) to provide data that may help COMs expand such opportunities. METHODS: Two online surveys were developed. The General Survey asked about general research opportunities, research requirements, and SRPs, which we define as optional, intramural, and mentored research programs. The follow-up SRP Survey sought to understand the history, funding, and organizational structure of SRPs. Between February and June 2021, the General and SRP Surveys were sent to all COMs in the United States. Response data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Responses were received from 32 (84.2%) of 38 COMs. Nearly all COMs offered research symposia, offered third- or fourth-year research elective rotations, and provided some form of funding for OMSs to participate in research. Fourteen (43.8%) COMs had mandatory research requirements. Twenty COMs (62.5%) offered 31 SRPs, and surveys were completed for 25 (80.6%) SRPs. SRPs were founded a median (range) of 7 (1-43) years prior and accommodated 20 (4-50) OMSs annually. Among the responding SRPs, 12.0% had external funding, 96.0% required applications, 50.0% interviewed applicants prior to acceptance into the program, 72.0% required OMSs to identify their own mentors, 68.0% offered stipends to OMSs, 28.0% offered course credits, 96.0% had clinical research opportunities, and 68.0% offered research-oriented didactics. In 84.0% of SRPs, OMSs worked predominantly in the summer after OMS-I; for these SRPs, students had 4-10 weeks of dedicated time for participation in research. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from our surveys provide a synopsis of the research opportunities currently provided by COMs in the United States. Our data demonstrated wide variability of research opportunities among COMs.

Medical Students' Perceptions on Research: Results from a Small European Island State.

BACKGROUND: A crucial aspect of medical education is research training. Many studies have been conducted targeting the publishing rate among medical students, but information is lacking about the perceptions of medical students towards research, especially of students studying in small island states. This study aims to investigate students' perceptions towards research and increase the insight on what motivates and hinders medical students to conduct research. METHODS: An anonymous mixed-methods cross-sectional online questionnaire was distributed to five hundred and forty-nine medical students studying at the University of Malta. The data gathered was statistically analysed and consequently interpreted. RESULTS: A response rate of 25.05% was achieved, with 10.00% of students having already published their research. Despite 86.43% of students interested in conducting research, only 22.86% have pursued a research endeavour. The main reason for conducting research was 'out of students' own interest'. The main barrier hindering students from conducting research was perceived as the absence of research opportunities. DISCUSSION: Medical students have a positive attitude towards the conduction of research, to enhance their medical education. Hence, identification of potential barriers hindering medical students from conducting research should be sought out and hands-on research opportunities should be provided, on an elective basis, to pursue their research interest. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-021-01426-4.

A survey study examining the motivations, concerns, and perspectives of medical students engaging in neurosurgical research.

BACKGROUND: In a competitive landscape for neurosurgical residency admission, research productivity is increasingly important. Medical school applicants to neurosurgery report high numbers of "scholarly products" as published by the National Residency Match Program. Despite increased student involvement in research and productivity, to the best of our knowledge, no previous reported studies have examined student perspectives on their involvement in neurosurgical research. METHODS: For 2 consecutive years (February 2019 and February 2020), medical students (n = 55) from around the United States presented original research at the Student Neurosurgical Research Conference. Participants were administered a mixed-method survey designed to assess experiences and perspectives on engaging in neurosurgical research. Survey responses were analyzed independently by two researchers to assess for common themes and perspectives. RESULTS: Medical students engaged in all types of research work across nearly every neurosurgical subfield with "Basic/Bench Lab work" (38.5%) and "Chart Review" (23.1%) representing the majority of projects. Students commonly cited "curiosity/interest," and "residency application competitiveness" as main reasons for participation in research. About 66% of respondents reported experiencing anxiety/concern about research productivity "often" or "very often." Thematic analysis revealed that sources of research-related stress were (1) having enough publications to match into residency, and (2) having enough time in medical school to engage in research. CONCLUSION: Medical students engaging in neurosurgical research are highly motivated students driven by scientific curiosity and pressure to prepare for competitive residency applications. Students experience anxiety due to time constraints in medical curricula and increasing demands for scholarly productivity.

Factors Determining Medical Students' Experience in an Independent Research Year During the Medical Program.

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate about best practice models to support active learning by encouraging medical students to conduct independent research projects. This study explored student satisfaction, experiences, and learning outcomes of a unique, mandatory research program in an Australian medical school. METHODS: Students were invited to complete an anonymous survey ranking statements using Likert scales and completing open-ended questions. Factors predicting student satisfaction with the research year were analysed using a generalised linear regression model. A content analysis of open-ended questions was conducted. RESULTS: The survey was completed in October 2019 by 117 of 252 students (46%). The majority (84%) reported satisfaction with the research year. Factors associated with satisfaction were research skills learnt (OR 2.782, 95% CI 1.428-5.421; p < 0.003), supervision and support (OR = 2.587, 95% CI 1.237-5.413; p < 0.012), and meaningfulness and experience (OR = 2.506, 95% CI 1.100-5.708; p < 0.029). Qualitative results confirmed support from the faculty and supervisors, perceiving their research as meaningful, and the opportunity to learn research skills were highly regarded by students. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that learning outcomes for basic research skills and high satisfaction rates can be achieved in a mandatory undergraduate research programme when students have dedicated time for their research, opportunities to negotiate their own project, and good support from faculty and mentors. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-021-01340-9.

The experiences, attitudes and understanding of research amongst medical students at an Australian medical school.

BACKGROUND: Research engagement plays an integral role in developing clinicians that practice effective, evidence-based medicine. Research participation by clinicians, however, is declining. Given the link between research during medical school and future research output, promotion of medical student research is one avenue by which this shortage can be addressed. Student research attitudes and participation in Australia are not well-documented in the literature. This study therefore aims to investigate research practices, motivators, and barriers amongst Australian medical students in order to determine whether there is a need for further integration of research within Australian medical school curriculums. METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was used to explore research experience and attitudes, as well as the enablers and barriers to research amongst students enrolled in all years of the five-year medical course at Monash University. A questionnaire was created by combining questions from several surveys on medical student research and comprised Likert scales, multiple choice options and free-text responses assessing research experience, attitudes, motivators, and barriers. RESULTS: Seven hundred and four respondents (69.4% female; survey response rate 36.7%) reported variable research experience and interest. Less than half of the cohort (n = 296; 44.9%) had contributed to a research project. Increasing employability for specialty training programs was the primary motivating factor (n = 345; 51.9%) for pursuing research, with only 20.5% (n = 136) citing an interest in academia as a motivator. Time constraints (n = 460; 65.3%) and uncertainty surrounding how to find research opportunities (n = 449; 63.8%) were the most common barriers to research. CONCLUSIONS: Medical students at Monash University are interested in but have limited experience with research. Students are, however, primarily motivated by the prospect of increasing employability for specialist training; medical schools should therefore focus on encouraging intrinsic motivation for pursuing research. Greater integration of research education and opportunities within medical school curricula may also be required to provide students with the skills necessary to both pursue research and practice evidence-based medicine.

Impact of Medical Student Research Fellowships on Otolaryngology Match Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: While many students participate in research years or fellowships prior to entering the otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) match, the effects of these fellowships on match outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the impact of research fellowships on odds of matching into OHNS. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. METHODS: Applications from first-time, US allopathic seniors between the 2014-2015 and the 2019-2020 application cycles were reviewed. Data were abstracted from Electronic Residency Application Service applications and match results determined using the National Residency Matching Program database and online public sources. The relationship between research fellowships and matching was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 1775 applicants included, nearly 16% (n = 275) participated in research fellowships and 84.1% matched (n = 1492). Research fellows were no more likely to match into OHNS than non-research fellows (86.9% vs. 83.5%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.31, P = .161), even when adjusting for applicant characteristics (predicted probability [PP]: 88.8% vs. 85.8%, adjusted OR 1.31, P = .210). For applicants from top 25 medical schools, however, research fellowships were associated with higher odds of matching (PP: 96.5% vs. 90.0%, adjusted OR 3.07, P = .017). In addition, completing a fellowship was associated with significantly greater odds of matching into a top 25 OHNS residency program (PP: 58.6% vs. 30.5%, adjusted OR 3.24, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Fellowships may be beneficial for select applicants, though for most, they are not associated with improved odds of matching. These findings provide context for OHNS residency candidates considering research fellowships and should be carefully weighed against other potential advantages and disadvantages of fellowships. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 131:E2506-E2512, 2021.

The National Student Neurosurgical Research Conference: A Research Conference for Medical Students.

OBJECTIVE: Medical students interested in neurosurgery are increasingly involved in research, and research conferences have proven valuable for developing medical research experience and exposure. A research conference was designed for medical students interested in neurosurgery to present research. METHODS: Our team designed an annual research conference at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University in conjunction with the Neurosurgery and Neurology Departments. In February 2019, we hosted the first Student Neurosurgical and Neurological Research Conference (SNRC), the first national research conference, to our knowledge, designed for medical students to present neurosurgical research in the United States. The conference consisted of student poster/oral presentations, keynote speeches from clinical faculty, and surgical skills workstations. In February 2020, we hosted the second SNRC. After each conference, participants (n = 55) completed a survey to assess student perspectives of the conference. RESULTS: Fifty-five medical students from around the nation attended the conferences to present their research. One hundred percent of participants affirmed that the conference fulfilled their primary reason for attending, which for most (54.5%) was the opportunity to present research. Thematic analysis revealed that students especially appreciated the "lower stress environment" and "opportunity to get feedback on their research." Notably, 97.6% of students felt the conference strengthened or increased their interest in neurosurgery. CONCLUSIONS: Participants felt that the SNRC was a valuable opportunity to present research in an environment conducive for practice and improvement. Research conferences primarily for medical students may support the development of young researchers while increasing and strengthening interest in the field of neurosurgery.

Medical Student Research in Surgery: From Abstract Presentation to Publication.

OBJECTIVE: Early career mentorship in surgical research often begins in medical school, and scholarly activity in the forms of abstract presentations and publications is seen as a critical criterion in residency applications. The goal of this study was to examine how often medical student abstract presentations at the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Clinical Congress are eventually published as peer-reviewed publications. DESIGN: Medical student abstract presentations from ACS Clinical Congress 2014 to 2018 were reviewed. Abstract information was cross-referenced for companion peer-reviewed publication in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. RESULTS: In total, 219 students presented abstracts at the ACS Clinical Congress between 2014 and 2018. Of these, 101 (46%) led to publications in 61 different journals. The percentage of presentations that were published was 63% from 2014, 51% from 2015, 56% from 2016, 39% from 2017, and 25% from 2018. Medical students were named as first authors on 54%, second authors on 19%, and third authors on 13% of publications. The basic science presentation category had the greatest conversion to publications (54%), followed by clinical research (48%) and outcomes (45%). CONCLUSIONS: Forty-six percent of medical student abstract presentations at the ACS Clinical Congress were converted to peer-reviewed publications. While it is encouraging that the ACS Clinical Congress is a productive forum to showcase medical student scholarly activity, more can be done to encourage full translation of research activity to peer-reviewed work. Further studies should be performed to look at influential factors amongst medical students, faculty mentors, and medical schools.

Impact of American Association of Neurological Surgeons Medical Student Interest Groups on Participation in Organized Neurosurgery, Research Productivity, and Residency Match Success.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the Young Neurosurgeons Committee under the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) began allowing medical schools to create AANS Medical Student Chapters. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these chapters on participation in organized neurosurgery, research productivity, and residency match success. METHODS: Chapter membership and activity data were collected and analyzed from 2014-2019 annual reports. RESULTS: The number of chapters increased rapidly during 2014-2019 from 12 to 121. The mean number of chapter members attending the AANS annual meeting trended upward during 2014-2019, from 1.25 to 1.67. Neurosurgery-related abstracts submitted, abstracts accepted, and publications authored by chapters have fluctuated with yearly means of 1.96, 1.76, and 9.29, respectively. Chapters from top 20 medical schools generally attended the annual meeting in greater numbers (2017-2018: 3.00 vs. 1.32, P = 0.076; 2018-2019: 2.92 vs. 1.43, P = 0.025), submitted more abstracts (2017-2018: 4.20 vs. 1.10, P = 0.021; 2018-2019: 4.09 vs. 1.87, P = 0.066), and had more abstracts accepted (2017-2018: 3.00 vs. 1.05, P = 0.043; 2018-2019: 3.63 vs. 1.81, P = 0.09). Chapters with high residency match success had a higher number of publications (11.4 vs. 3.3, P = 0.03) and twice the number of members attending the annual meeting (1.9 vs. 0.9, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Since their inception, AANS Medical Student Chapters have demonstrated substantial research productivity and involvement in organized neurosurgery. Furthermore, there is an association between higher chapter activity, manifested by publications and annual meeting attendance, and increased residency match success.

Example-Based Learning as a Guide for Revising a Peer-Reviewed Manuscript.

Publishing medical research is an increasingly competitive process for junior researchers. One critical step is revising a manuscript with editorial team feedback. This article's purpose is to utilize a novel example-based learning approach to provide trainees and junior faculty with ten steps on how to successfully navigate the manuscript peer-review process. To this end, each step in the proposed guide is correlated with the authors' most recent publication experience, with key manuscript and editor response letter versions made available through an open-access digital repository.