Trends in research grant applications and outcomes among medical students in the United Kingdom: a national self-reported cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Research funding disparities contribute to clinical academic workforce inequalities. Hence, our study explores the association between student demographics and research grant application rates and outcomes among UK medical students.

METHODS

This is a national multicentre cross-sectional survey of UK medical students in the 2020-21 academic year. Multiple zero-inflated negative binomial regression and generalized linear model (binomial distribution; logit link) were utilized to investigate the association between student demographics, number of grant applications submitted, and successful grant applications (yes or no). P-values less than a Bonferroni-corrected significance level of 0.05/36 = 0.0014 were considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 1528 students participated from 36 medical schools. One hundred fifty-one respondents (9.9%) had applied for research grants. Black students submitted applications 2.90 times more often than white students [Incident rate ratio (IRR): 2.90, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.37-6.16], with no ethnic disparity in the odds of successful applications. Gender did not influence application rates significantly (P = .248), but women were 4.61 times more likely to secure a grant than men [odds ratio: 4.61, 95% CI: 2.04-10.4]. Being a PubMed-indexed author was associated with increased grant application submission rates [IRR: 3.61, 95% CI: 2.20- 5.92] while conducting more research was associated with greater odds of securing a grant [odds ratio: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.17- 1.73].

CONCLUSION

Although black students submitted more applications, ethnicity did not influence success rates. Gender did not influence application rates, but women were more successful. These findings underscore the need for strategies supporting women and underrepresented students for continued academic achievement after graduation.

KEY MESSAGES

What is already known on this topic Research funding for post-PhD researchers is believed to be a major driver of gender and ethnic inequalities in the clinical academic workforce.Students who receive research grants are more likely to receive postgraduate research grants.What this study adds Black students applied for more research grants than white students, but there were no ethnic differences in the odds of securing a grant.There were no gender differences in the research grant application rates. However, female students had greater odds of securing research grants compared to male students.How this study might affect research, practice or policy Medical schools should incorporate grant writing skills into the undergraduate research curriculum. Also, to sustain women's academic success post medical school, the NIHR and affiliates should provide research award extensions and childcare support for women when required.

Predictors of self-reported research engagement and academic-career interest amongst medical students in the United Kingdom: a national cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

We hypothesised that the gender/ethnic disparities and reductions in the UK academic-clinician workforce stem from research experience in medical school. This study investigated the factors influencing research engagement and academic-career interests among UK medical students.

METHODS

Using a 42-item online questionnaire, a national multicentre cross-sectional survey of UK medical students was conducted over 9 weeks in the 2020/21 academic year. Multiple binary logistic and zero-inflated negative binomial regressions were used to evaluate associations between the predictor variables and research engagement (yes/no), number of research projects conducted, and academic-career interest (yes/no). P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

In total, 1573 students participated from 36 medical schools. No ethnic/gender differences in research engagement were observed. However, compared to men, women had a 31% decrease in the odds of being interested in an academic-clinician career [odds ratio (OR): 0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52, 0.92]. Positive predictors of interest in academia were being a PubMed-indexed author (OR: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.38, 3.47) and having at least one national/international presentation (OR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.88). Career progression was the primary motivating factor (67.1%) for pursuing research, whereas limited awareness of opportunities (68.0%) and time constraints (67.5%) were the most common barriers.

CONCLUSION

There were no ethnic differences in research engagement or academic-career intent. Although there were no gender differences in research engagement, female students were less likely to be interested in an academic career. This could be tackled by providing targeted opportunities to increase research productivity and self-efficacy in medical schools. Key messages: What is already known on this topic: There has been a decline in the number of academic clinicians, with a disproportionate gender and ethnic representation in the academic workforce. Engaging medical students in research activities during their medical training could mitigate the declining number of academic clinicians. Differential attainment occurs in medical school and persists after graduation. What this study adds: Although there were no gender/ethnic differences in research engagement amongst UK medical students, our study suggests that female students were less likely to be interested in pursuing an academic career. Time constraints, a lack of awareness of opportunities, and difficulty in finding research supervisors/mentors were the most common barriers to research engagement, whereas PubMed-indexed authorship was the strongest positive predictor of interest in an academic career. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy: Medical schools should facilitate the selection of good-quality research mentors that would provide adequate support to ensure that their students' works are published in peer-reviewed journals. Medical schools should employ local research officers to increase students' awareness of research opportunities.

A Systematic Review of the Effects of Capsaicin on Alzheimer's Disease

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterised by cognitive impairment, and amyloid-β plaques and neurofibrillary tau tangles at neuropathology. Capsaicin is a spicy-tasting compound found in chili peppers, with anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and possible neuroprotective properties. Capsaicin intake has been associated with greater cognitive function in humans, and attenuating aberrant tau hyperphosphorylation in a rat model of AD. This systematic review discusses the potential of capsaicin in improving AD pathology and symptoms. A systematic analysis was conducted on the effect of capsaicin on AD-associated molecular changes, cognitive and behaviour resulting in 11 studies employing rodents and/or cell cultures, which were appraised with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Ten studies showed capsaicin attenuated tau deposition, apoptosis, and synaptic dysfunction; was only weakly effective on oxidative stress; and had conflicting effects on amyloid processing. Eight studies demonstrated improved spatial and working memory, learning, and emotional behaviours in rodents following capsaicin treatment. Overall, capsaicin showed promise in improving AD-associated molecular, cognitive, and behavioural changes in cellular and animal models, and further investigations are recommended to test the readily available bioactive, capsaicin, to treat AD.

Predictors of self-reported research productivity amongst medical students in the United Kingdom: a national cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

The number of academic clinicians in the UK is declining and there are demographic inequalities in the clinical-academic workforce. Increased research productivity by medical students is believed to reduce future attrition in the clinical-academic workforce. Thus, this study investigated the association between student demographics and research productivity amongst UK medical students.

METHODS

This is a national multicentre cross-sectional study of UK medical students in the 2020/21 academic year. We appointed one student representative per medical school, and they disseminated a 42-item online questionnaire over nine weeks, through departmental emails and social media advertisements. The outcome measures were: (i) publications (yes/no) (ii) number of publications (iii) number of first-authored publications (iv) abstract presentation (yes/no). We utilised multiple logistic and zero-inflated Poisson regression analyses to test for associations between the outcome measures and predictor variables at a 5% significance level.

RESULTS

There are 41 medical schools in the UK. We received 1573 responses from 36 UK medical schools. We failed to recruit student representatives from three newly formed medical schools, whilst two medical schools prohibited us from sending the survey to their students. Women had lower odds of having a publication (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.33-0.85) and on average had fewer first-author publications than men (IRR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37-0.89). Compared to white students, mixed-ethnicity students had greater odds of having a publication (OR: 3.06, 95% CI: 1.67-5.59), an abstract presentation (OR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.37-3.26), and on average had a greater number of publications (IRR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.02-3.43). On average, students who attended independent UK secondary schools had a higher rate of first-author publications compared to those that attended state secondary schools (IRR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.23-3.15).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that there are gender, ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities in research productivity among UK medical students. To tackle this, and potentially improve diversity in clinical academia, we recommend that medical schools should facilitate targeted high quality research mentorship, funding and training, especially for under-represented-in-medicine students.

Predictors of self-reported research self-efficacy and perception of research amongst medical students in the United Kingdom: a national cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

There has been a decline in the number of academic clinicians in the UK, and there are ethnic/gender disparities in the academic workforce. Higher research self-efficacy (RSE) and a positive perception of research (PoR) amongst students are associated with a higher motivation to engage in academic medicine. Hence, this study aimed to determine the factors that influence RSE and PoR amongst UK medical students.

METHODS

This is a multicentre cross-sectional survey of medical students in 36 UK medical schools in the 2020/21 academic year. Multiple linear regression was used to investigate the association between students' demographics and RSE/PoR. P-values less than a Bonferroni-corrected significance level of .05/28 = .0018 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

In total, 1573 individuals participated from 36 medical schools. There were no ethnic differences in PoR or RSE scores. Although there were no gender differences in PoR, female students had lower RSE scores than male students (adjusted β = -1.75; 95% CI: -2.62, -0.89). Research experience before medical school (adjusted β = 3.02; 95% CI: 2.11, 3.93), being in the clinical training phase (adjusted β = 1.99; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.90), and completing a degree before medical school (adjusted β = 3.66; 95% CI: 2.23, 5.09) were associated with higher RSE.

CONCLUSION

There were no associations between the predictor variables and PoR. Female students had lower self-reported RSE scores. Future studies should investigate the role of targeted research mentorship in improving RSE amongst female medical students.