ABSTRACT
Objectives Conducting research during medical school is a commonly described way to strengthen the physician-scientists workforce. The aim of this study is to compare the strength of association of Expectancy, Value and Cost regarding a research activity with future research intentions, and to explore differences between students with or without research experience during medical school.
Design, setting and participants An online questionnaire was sent to final-year medical students – who had already chosen their specialty – in three French-speaking Belgian universities with non-mandatory research programmes. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and multiple regression analysis were conducted.
Main measures Research intention (outcome measure) was assessed using a 3-item scale. The motivational beliefs were assessed using a 10-item scale adapted from a validated scale based on the Expectancy-Value- Cost theory. Responses were recorded on a 6-point Likert scale.
Results Participation rate was 28% (n=237). EFA revealed 4 factors with high internal consistency. 21.5% of students had positive research intentions (score 5 or above). Our model explained 82.8% of research intention variance (p < 0.001), of which three motivational beliefs had statistically significant coefficients: i) Value given to a research activity (β = 0.72, p < 0.001); ii) perceived Cost of a research activity (β = -0.11, p < 0.01); iii) Expectancy of success (β = 0.10, p < 0.05). Students with a positive research experience or students without research experience but who had strongly considered achieving one were 11.5 times more likely (95% CI, 5.0 – 26.2) to have positive research intentions at the end of medical school than other students.
Conclusions Value given to a research activity is the key factor regarding students’ motivation to undertake research. Our study confirms the positive relationship between non-mandatory research and future research intentions, although some students without a research experience showed high motivation as well.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the ethical review board of the Universite Catholique de Louvain (Centre d'Ethique hospitalo-facultaire) : reference 2017/26 JAN/045.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data are available in a public, open access repository (UCLouvain Dataverse)
