Assessing the Impact of a Comprehensive Integrated Research Module on Medical Student Publications and Research Engagement: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Arab Emirates

Assessing the Impact of a Comprehensive Integrated Research Module on Medical Student Publications and Research Engagement: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Arab Emirates | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Assessing the Impact of a Comprehensive Integrated Research Module on Medical Student Publications and Research Engagement: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Arab Emirates Ayatullah Hegazy, Saad Syed, Farah Ennab, Reem Hatem, Stefan S. Du Plessis, and 4 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6911251/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background In the context of the current rapidly evolving and dynamic medical landscape, the integration of research into undergraduate medical education is crucial for addressing the global deficit of physician-scientists. At Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), the Doctor of Medicine (MD) curriculum incorporates a compulsory research module designed to equip students with essential research skills through a combination of theoretical instruction, hands-on practice, and mentor-guided learning. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive research module on undergraduate medical students’ research productivity. It examines outcomes across the types of publications (original articles, reviews, and descriptive studies), their characteristics (authorship position, publication timing, and journal category), and their quality (journal indexing, impact factor, and citation metrics). Through this template of a bibliometric registry for compiling research publications, the study seeks to gain essential insights into the value of integrating research into the medical curriculum and its role in cultivating future clinician-scientists. Methods This retrospective cohort study analyzed the research output of medical students enrolled in the MD program at MBRU. When this study began on June 1, 2023, MBRU, being a newly established medical university had celebrated the graduation of its first two cohorts in June 2022 and June 2023. The first cohort began August 2016, and the second August 2017. The analysis included all student-authored publications up to December 31, 2023. This timeframe corresponds to a follow-up period of 7.5 years for Cohort 2022 and 6.5 years for Cohort 2023. A comprehensive retrieval of students’ publications was identified through the MBRU research registry, PubMed searches, and tracing graduates' ORCID IDs. Twenty-six variables were analyzed, encompassing data on graduation information, study design, authorship, journal indexing, ranking information, and citations. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze quantitative data, while categorical data were summarized using frequencies and percentages. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results A total of 84 students with publications from January 01, 2017, to December 31, 2023, were included in the study. A total of 321 research projects were identified, and after removing duplicates, 169 unique publications were found. Among the students, 59 (70.2%) had at least one publication. For these students the median number of publications was 2.0 per student in both cohorts. Additionally, 21 students (25.0%) published their curricular dissertation as part of the research module course. An analysis of publishing identifiers showed that 133 (78.7%) articles had a PMID, while 104 (61.5%) articles had a PMCID. No significant differences were observed between the two cohorts. Furthermore, 34 students (57.6%) had an ORCID ID. Students contributed to a diverse range of study designs. The most common publication types were editorials, letters critiquing published articles in dedicated journals, commentaries, abstracts, or short communications that did not report new observations or data (n = 61, 36.1%). Cohort 2022 contributed significantly more to these publication types than Cohort 2023 (p = 0.0047). Descriptive epidemiological studies were also common, including 21 case reports (12.4%) and 27 cross-sectional studies (16.0%). Cohort 2023 had a significantly higher contribution to this type of publication (p = 0.0093). Case-control, cohort, experimental, systematic reviews and meta-analysis were less common in both cohorts. Regarding authorship positions, 72 (42.6%) of articles had a student as the first author and 54 (32.0%) included two or more students as authors. The total number of College of Medicine (CoM) publications involving students increased from 2017 to 2023, peaking in 2022 with 56 (28.6%) out of the 196 indexed, peer-reviewed articles. Overall, 120 (71.0%) of student-authored publications were published in Q1 or Q2 journals. Conclusion A comprehensive approach to monitoring student research contributions offers valuable insights into the effectiveness of integrating research into medical education. Early engagement of medical students in research as part of their undergraduate journey enhances their ability of implementing evidence-driven decision-making and supports their development into clinician-scientists who adhere to evidence-based medicine. Student Research Publication Undergraduate Medical Education Research Curriculum Clinician-Scientists Bibliometric Registry United Arab Emirates Mentors Research Engagement Research Skills Evidence-based Medicine Longitudinal Research Training Educational Outcomes Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 INTRODUCTION The incorporation of research modules into undergraduate education has a long-standing history across various academic disciplines, such as architecture, engineering, and social sciences, where they promote creativity, critical analysis, and evidence-based practice (1, 2). Similarly in medical education, research modules are effective in fostering analytical skills and scientific inquiry, which are crucial for evidence based clinical practice. Salam et al. showed that mandatory undergraduate research projects in the medical curriculum bridge the gap between education and practice, demonstrating how structured research initiatives can cultivate skills that are directly transferable to professional environments, enhancing both academic and career readiness (3). In the context of the current rapidly evolving and dynamic medical landscape, the integration of research into undergraduate medical education is crucial for addressing the global deficit of physician-scientists who are essential for advancing medical practice and innovation. Research not only enhances educational experience but also plays a crucial role in fostering a sustained interest in research (4, 5). The benefits of research extend across multiple domains. For patients, research leads to improved care outcomes through the creation of novel therapies and the application of evidence-based medicine, ensuring that clinical decisions are rooted in the latest scientific knowledge (6). The integration of research into clinical practice empowers clinicians to stay abreast of emerging advances, refine therapeutic precision, and adopt new treatments judiciously, ensuring optimal patient care (7). As for medical trainees, engaging in research cultivates critical thinking skills, enhances clinical reasoning, and broadens career prospects, contributing to greater professional satisfaction (6). It has been shown that mandatory undergraduate project such as those at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, foster a culture of research and help students develop essential skills ranging from project design to final reporting (3). Moreover, Otaki et al. conducted a study investigating undergraduate medical students' perceptions of an integrated research module. The findings revealed that students began to appreciate the modules challenges as they recognized its value, and understanding advanced significantly once they started conducting research (10). Similarly, findings by Bakker et al. further supports this, showing that hands-on mandatory research projects at Leiden University Medical Center, combined with flexible learning pathways, lead to significant research output and can serve as a springboard for a research-oriented career (8). Moreover, a study by Waaijer et al. demonstrated that students who published during medical school were twice as likely to publish afterward, highlighting the long-term benefits of early research engagement (9). Despite the widespread adoption of research courses in medical programs, a significant gap still remains in understanding the sustained impact of students’ research involvement during their clinical years and its potential long-term effects on their careers (10, 11). Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive research module on undergraduate medical students’ research productivity. Through this bibliometric registry, the study seeks to gain essential insights into the value of integrating research into the medical curriculum and its role in cultivating future clinician-scientists. Moreover, this aim aligns with the objectives outlined in the “Future of Higher Education in the United Arab Emirates, November 2024” emphasizing the quantification of student research outcome (12). METHODS 3 The undergraduate medical university This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the College of Medicine (CoM) at Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE) (https://www.mbru.ac.ae/). This medical university, established in 2016, is less than ten years and serves as the academic partner of Dubai Health, the first integrated academic healthcare system in Dubai. Dubai Health combines medical education, research, and patient care, aiming to enhance healthcare quality by integrating academic institutions with clinical practice to train future health care physicians more effectively. The MBRU Doctor of Medicine (MD) is an undergraduate program, admitting students directly after high school without requiring a prior bachelor’s degree. The first cohort of undergraduate medical students began end of August 2016. The MD curriculum is a six-year program divided into three phases, comprising 12 semesters with 2 semesters per year (Table 1). The undergraduate program at MBRU adopts a progressive approach to medical education through its ‘spiral’ curriculum. In this approach, key concepts and topics are revisited at multiple stages throughout the six-year program, with increasing depth and complexity reinforcing learning and promoting long-term retention (13, 14). Phases 1 and 2 of the programs, spanning Year 1 (40 weeks) and Years 2 and 3 (80 weeks), emphasize basic biomedical and behavioral sciences such as anatomy, biochemistry, pharmacology, microbiology, and research methods. Year 1 establishes foundational knowledge, while clinical context is introduced through early exposure to healthcare settings. In Years 2 and 3, students advance to the study of pathophysiology, diagnostics, and therapeutics using case-based learning, alongside clinical skills training in communication, physical examination, diagnostic reasoning, and patient management. These courses provide students with a strong foundation as they transition into Phase 3 (Years 4, 5 and 6), involving clinical clerkship (15). Phase 3 (120 weeks) is delivered primarily in clinical settings, offering direct patient care experiences, supplemented by case discussions and tutorials. 4 Structure of the Research Curriculum The CoM offers a unique, longitudinal research module spanning the first three years (Phases 1 and 2) of the program (13). This includes five-integrated research courses introduced during the first five consecutive semesters of the undergraduate program, beginning when students enter the medical school. The courses cover topics in epidemiology, biostatistics, and research methodology, with a total of 9 credit hours (Table 1). The curriculum features early vertical integration and mandates student-led research projects, with opportunities in clinical, translational, medical education, and artificial intelligence research. This approach aligns with the principles of a spiral curriculum, allowing students to progressively build on their knowledge while supporting horizontal integration with basic sciences The research module begins in Year 1 (Phase 1) with two integrated 1-credit courses delivered in Semesters 1 and 2. These courses introduce students to epidemiology, biostatistics, and research methodology, providing a structured foundation for developing scholarly competencies (Table 1). During years 2 and 3 (spanning three semesters), research training continues with three consecutive courses of increasing complexity. It begins with a 2-credit course that reinforces foundational concepts, followed by intermediate (Semester 4, 2 credits) and advanced (Semester 5, 3 credits) courses that emphasize empirical application. These courses allow students to engage in hands-on research by designing and conducting their own studies, thereby consolidating their proficiency in research design and methodological rigor within a vertically integrated curriculum structure (Table 1). As part of this integrated five-course research module, medical students engage in the conceptualization, development, and execution of their own research projects (10). Each student is assigned a dedicated research supervisor, who maybe an academic, physician, or allied health professional, and provides guidance throughout the process (13). Supervisors provide a range of research topics, from which students select according to their interests. These topics span biomedical studies (clinical or laboratory-based) as well as socio-behavioral areas such as medical education. All research projects are submitted for institutional review board approval. The module concludes with a dissertation and a conference-style poster presentation, equipping students with the skills to practice evidence-based medicine and contribute to knowledge generation. This aligns with the College of Medicine Program Learning Outcome (PLO) of our undergraduate medical university (10). While publication is not mandatory upon completion of the module, students are encouraged to continue working with their assigned supervisors to further develop and publish their research. The preceding five-course research curriculum enables students in years 4 to 6 to apply evidence-based approaches during clerkships, including literature appraisal, clinical audits, and scholarly projects (Table 1). This vertical integration enhances students' ability to formulate relevant research questions, select appropriate methodologies, and engage in quality improvement initiatives throughout their clinical training. 5 Eligibility criteria To be eligible for inclusion in the study, students must have graduated from the MD program. At the time the study began on June 1, 2023, only two cohorts had completed the program, Cohort 2022 and Cohort 2023, and were therefore the only groups eligible for analysis. These two graduating cohorts provided a unique opportunity to assess the impact of the research curriculum. Research impact was defined as the production of publications within a period starting from the commencement of the research module in Year 1, Semester 1 (September 1, 2016), and extending to at least six months after graduation. To assess this impact, all publications between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, were included in the analysis. Students who had not yet graduated by June 1, 2023, or whose publications fell outside the defined timeframe were excluded from the analysis. 6 Tracking student research output A complete list of student names was obtained from the university student services department. Two authors (AH and SS) conducted a comprehensive retrieval of students’ publications, including the assigned supervised student research projects, conference proceedings, protocols, pre-prints, published abstracts, and peer reviewed publications. The names were manually searched to ensure a comprehensive compilation of relevant scholarly outputs. Student publications were identified from multiple sources including ORCID, PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar. Additionally, the MBRU Al Maktoum Medical Library repository was extensively searched for any additional information. Also, students were sent an email to verify and supplement their publication records, achieving a response rate of 60%. Two authors (AH and SS) independently collected information for all publication data by searching SCOPUS and PubMed and subsequently cross-checked each other’s entries to ensure accuracy in the bibliometric registry. Any discrepancies were resolved through consensus in consultation with the study’s primary investigator (AA). To evaluate student research impact, we first defined specific criteria for measurement, including the number of student publications and the platforms where their research was published. Using these criteria, we systematically gathered information to create a comprehensive and continuously updated bibliometric registry. This registry serves as a valuable tool to quantify student research output, assess the quality and impact of their work, and evaluate the alignment of the integrated research module the institutional goals. 2 .5 Data collection Search strategy The search strategy included all MBRU medical students, enrolled in the MD program from the 2022 and 2023 cohorts. All student publications produced between September 1, 2016, to December 31, 2023, were included to capture research activity both before graduation and up to 6 months (Cohort 2023) or 18 months (Cohort 2022) post-graduation. This approach aimed to provide insights into the immediate impact of the mandatory research module. Data collection was conducted between January and November 2024. Developing a Bibliometric Registry of Student Research Publications To gain an in-depth understanding of the publication practices of our medical students, 26 variables were collected and are summarized in Table 2. These variables assess publication outcomes across several dimensions, including publication type (original articles, reviews, descriptive studies, and non-peer-reviewed works), characteristics (authorship position, timing of publication, and journal category), and quality indicators (journal indexing, impact factor, and citation metrics). These outcomes serve as measurable indicators of research skill retention and scholarly impact. Journal impact factors were obtained from Web of Science, while CiteScores were sourced from Scopus. Journal rankings were retrieved from the SCImago Journal Rank (SCImagoJR), and percentile rankings within subject fields were based on Scopus data. 6.6 Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 29.0. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze quantitative data, while categorical data were described using frequencies and percentages. The normality of the data was assessed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test. The Chi-square test or Fisher’s Exact test were used to compare associations between categorical variables. The Mann-Whitney U Test was used for comparing independent groups when the data were continuous or ordinal, and not normally distributed. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. 2.6 Ethical Approval The study was approved by the relevant MBRU IRB Committee (Reference #MBRU IRB-2023-54) and by the Dubai Scientific Research Ethics Committee (DSREC), Dubai Health Authority (DSREC-06/2024_17). RESULTS The analysis included the full population of 84 students, with 49 graduating in 2022 and 35 in 2023. Between September 1, 2016, and the fixed endpoint of December 31, 2023 (Table 3), a total of 321 student-involved research projects were identified. This period corresponds to 7.5 years of follow-up for the 2022 cohort and 6.5 years for the 2023 cohort. The 2022 cohort participated in 235 projects, resulting in 196 publications, while the 2023 cohort was involved in 86 projects, yielding 63 publications. After removing duplicates, 131 unique publications remained for the 2022 cohort and 45 to the 2023 cohort. Seven publications were co-authored by students from both cohorts, resulting in a final total of 169 unique student-authored publications in the database 2023 (Table 3). Publication identifiers were analyzed, revealing 133 articles (78.7%) had a PMID, while 104 (61.5%) had a PMCID. No significant differences were observed between the cohorts regarding the presence of PMIDs or PMCIDs. Additionally, 34 students (40.5%) had an ORCID iD. Regarding authorship positions, 72 publications (42.6%) had students as first authors, with 49 (37.4%) publications from cohort 2022 and 23 (51.1%) from the 2023 cohort. Additionally, 54 student research included two or more students as authors. For corresponding authorship, 27 (15.9%) of students were listed, with 18 students (13.7%) from the 2022 cohort and 9 (20.0%) from the 2023 cohort. A total of 49 (29.0%) articles had a principal investigator from MBRU. Additionally, 29 (17.2%) received internal (MBRU) or external (non-MBRU) funding, with 19 (14.5%) for cohort 2022 and 11 (24.4%) for cohort 2023 (Table 3). The data did not differ significantly between cohrots. Among the total research projects undertaken by the students in both cohorts, 59 students (70.2%) had at least one publication, with 38 (77.6%) from the 2022 cohort and 21 (60.0%) from the 2023 cohort (Table 3). For students who published, the median number of publications was 2.0 per student in both cohorts. A total of 25 (29.8%) students did not publish any research, including 11 (22.4%) students from the 2022 cohort and 14 (40.0%) students from the 2023 cohort. Table 3 categorizes the students who published based on the number of publications: 20 students (33.9%) had only one publication, 15 (25.4%) had two publications, 15 (25.4%) had three to six publications, and 9 (15.3%) had seven or more. Additionally, 21 students (25.0%) published their curricular dissertation as part of the research module course, with 10 students (20.4%) from the 2022 cohort and 11 students (31.4%) from 2023 cohort. The difference in publication rates of curricular dissertations between the two cohorts was not statistically significant (Table 3). Students contributed to a diverse range of study designs (Figure 1). Most publications across both cohorts were editorials, letters, commentaries, abstracts, protocols or short communications, comprising 65 (38.5%) of total publications. Cohort 2022 contributed significantly more with 54 publications (41.2%) compared to 8 (17.8%) from cohort 2023 (p = 0.0047). Descriptive studies were also common, with case reports (21 publications, 12.4%) and cross-sectional studies (27 publications, 16.0%). Cohort 2023 contributed more to this type of publications (p = 0.0093). As for analytical studies, including case control studies (6 publications, 3.6%), cohort studies (8 publications, 4.7%), and experimental studies (8 publications, 4.7%), were less common. Similarly, review articles such as non-systematic reviews (10 publications, 5.9%), systematic reviews (10 publications, 5.9%), and meta-analysis (9 publications, 5.3%), were less frequent. A few publications were book chapters (3 publications, 1.8%), with no statistically significant differences between cohorts. Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of publications based on the Impact Factor of the journal in which they were published: 6 (3.6%) articles appeared in journals with an Impact Factor (IF) of <1, 10 articles (5.9%) in journals with an IF of 1 to 2, 15 articles (8.9%) in journals with and an IF of 2 to 3 and 59 articles (34.9%) in journals with an IF of 3 or higher. Similarly, the CiteScore (CS) of journals where articles were published was extracted from Scopus: 11 (6.5%) articles were published in journals with a CS of <1, 17 (10.1%) in those with CS of 1 to 2, 11 (6.5%) in those with CS of 2 to 3 and 88 (52.1%) had a CS of 3 or more (Figure 2). Figure 3 displays the distribution of articles according to the Quartile of the journals they were published in on both Scopus or SCImago with 120 (71.0%) publications in either Q1 or Q2 journals: 68 (40.2%) in Q1 journals and 52 (30.8%) in Q2. As for Q3 journals there were 37 (21.9%) and 11 (6.5%) in Q4. Figure 4 shows the distribution of articles published by number of citations on Scopus and Google Scholar. The median number of citations on Scopus was 2 ranging from 0 to 186, and the median number of citations on Google Scholars was 3 ranging from 0 to 318. Figure 5 highlights the indexed, peer-reviewed student co-authored publications (n = 110) as a subset of the total publications produced by the CoM (n = 850) from the establishment of MBRU on September 1, 2016, to fixed endpoint of December 31, 2023. No student publications were recorded in 2016 as students had not yet started their research module. Overall, students contributed to 13% of the CoM total research output during this period. A notable rise in student publications was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with output increasing from 11 in 2020 to 30 in 2021, mirroring a broader increase in CoM research activity. DISCUSSION Integrating a mandatory research module into the core curriculum of the CoM at MBRU had a substantial impact on student publication productivity, significantly contributing to the overall scholarly output of the college. Notably, more than 70% of students had at least one publication, and a quarter achieved more than three publications within up to one year after graduation. Additionally, a quarter of the students published their curricular dissertations, highlighting the mandatory research module’s effectiveness in fostering research productivity among young medical students. Remarkably, these publication rates far exceeded those reported by other medical institutions, where only 0.8% of theses submitted resulted in peer-reviewed publications, 54.2 % of which were led by students (16). No studies have explored the quality of undergraduate student publications in mandatory curriculums. However, our study investigated the quality of student research, with more than one-third of the articles published in journals with an impact factor of three or higher. Most of these publications appeared in Q1 and Q2 journals, reflecting the module’s success in enhancing students' research capabilities and enabling them to achieve their first peer-reviewed publication. Importantly, our study focused on student-authored publications that followed their completion of the integrated research module, strengthening the likelihood that their research productivity was a direct result of the mandatory component. This study showed that collaboration also played a role in this success. Students who formed groups and worked on research projects together were noted to have an increased likelihood of publishing multiple projects, showing the importance of collaboration with peers. Additionally, students from both cohorts collaborated on seven publications, highlighting the role of senior students in mentoring their peers and creating research opportunities. A broader theoretical lens allows for a more nuanced understanding of these findings, positioning them within established socio-cultural frameworks. Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital provides a compelling lens through which to interpret the significance of integrating structured research modules in medical education (17). Cultural capital embodied in scientific literacy, research skills, and the ability to engage with scholarly discourse acts as a powerful determinant of professional and academic success. In the context of medical education, the acquisition of research experience is not merely an additive skill but a transformative process that confers epistemic authority, enhances cognitive flexibility, and fosters deeper engagement with evidence-based practice (18, 19). This aligns with Bourdieu’s notion of field, where academic medicine functions as a structured social space in which individuals navigate power relations through accumulated capital. By embedding a research-intensive curriculum, institutions effectively democratize access to cultural capital, thereby reducing disparities in research engagement and publication rates (20). Furthermore, the findings from this study, particularly the high percentage of student publications in Q1 and Q2 journals demonstrate how institutionalized research curricula act as mechanisms for symbolic capital acquisition, legitimizing students’ positions within the broader scientific community. Complementary socio-cultural theories further substantiate the significance of these findings. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), underscores the role of structured mentorship and peer collaboration in accelerating students’ research competency (21). By facilitating guided participation in scholarly work, the research module enables students to transition from peripheral to full participation in the academic field, reinforcing Lave and Wenger’s Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) model within communities of practice (22). This dynamic aligns with Bernstein’s Code Theory, which suggests that access to specialized knowledge (in this case, research training) is a function of institutional structuring that determines the distribution of epistemic capital (23). The presence of structured mentorship and peer networks further aligns with Coleman’s Social Capital Theory, which emphasizes that academic success is contingent on the quality of relational networks and the ability to leverage these connections for skill acquisition and professional growth (24). Additionally, Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action provides insight into the ways in which research training fosters a discourse-oriented learning environment (25). Engaging in research and academic publishing exposes students to a participatory, dialogic mode of knowledge construction, where they actively contribute to the scientific community rather than passively consuming information. This perspective reinforces the argument that the research module not only enhances individual competencies but also cultivates an ethos of collaborative knowledge production within the medical education system. Taken together, these theoretical frameworks provide a robust socio-cultural justification for the structured integration of research in medical curricula, illustrating how research engagement functions as both an educational tool and a social mechanism for fostering professional identity, academic mobility, and long-term career advancement. By incorporating this research module, we provided students with the opportunity to participate in more research projects by connecting them to mentors at the university and within the Dubai healthcare systems who have research opportunities, allowing them to contribute significantly to the college’s research output. This outcome can be attributed to students developing an interest in ongoing research projects or initiating new collaborations with principal investigators at the university, as demonstrated by our findings. Although university supervisors were involved in only a quarter of the research projects, adjunct faculty based in hospitals were not accounted for due to the continuously changing faculty list. As a result, the impact of mentorship from investigators, whether within the university or affiliated institutions, is likely underestimated. Furthermore, all mentors received structured guidelines and ongoing support through an open-door initiative with the core team, ensuring that challenges were addressed promptly. Both students and supervisors also had access to a weekly research clinic, providing a regular opportunity to seek advice and guidance from the core team. Several studies have identified barriers regarding student publications, including lack of knowledge and training about the publication process. For instance, one study showed that 92% of the students at British medical schools agreed they would not be able to submit a paper without supervision (26). Ejaz et al. showed in their study that 41% of undergraduate medical students have participated in research projects, mostly during the data collection process or computer work only (27). Additionally, the absence of mentorship was highlighted as a significant obstacle for students undertaking research projects (28). Integrating the research module early in the curriculum addresses these challenges by exposing students to the research environment and equipping them with essential skills, such as scientific writing, data analysis, and article publishing. This foundation fosters confidence in approaching supervisors, engaging in collaborative writing, analyzing data, and presenting or publishing research findings. Notably, our results revealed that 72 publications were led by students as first authors. By assigning supervisors to guide students through their first research projects, we ensure they receive critical mentorship and skill development. While many students initially considered the module challenging, Otaki et al. reported an increase in interest toward research as medical students progressed and began applying the learned concepts in their own research studies (13). Similarly, den Bakker, et al. noted an increase in inclination towards a research-oriented career after mandatory research projects (8). This aligns with findings from another study showing that research participation increases students' interest in academic careers and further opportunities, such as publishing and presenting their work (29). Integrating a mandatory research module into the curriculum significantly enhanced student research productivity, as evidenced by substantial publication output, high-quality publications in reputable journals, and an increased interest in pursuing careers as clinician-scientists. This success highlights the importance of early exposure to research and structured mentorship in fostering a culture of scientific inquiry among medical students. Establishing a sustainable bibliometric research registry is essential for analyzing the types of research produced by students. Such a registry would enable the evaluation of their contributions to evidence-based medical practice. Furthermore, analyzing this data provides tangible evidence of the mandatory research module's effectiveness, support continuous program improvement, and enhance the program's external recognition. By leveraging these insights, the module continues to cultivate future clinician-scientists and strengthen its impact on medical education. Moreover, this highlights the broader significance of the research module in advancing national and educational priorities to shape the future of higher education in the UAE by meeting the research outcome requirements for universities. This aligns with the “Future of Higher Education in the United Arab Emirates, November 2024” that recently published a policy promoting undergraduate student research (12). Limitations While this study provides valuable insights into student research productivity following the integration of a mandatory research module, several limitations should be considered. First, the observational nature of the study limits the ability to establish causal inferences between the module and research productivity. While the findings demonstrate an increase in student-led publications, evidenced by publication volume, quality metrics, and journal ranking, these outcomes may also be influenced by factors such as student motivation, prior academic achievement, or the broader institutional research environment. Future prospective studies with control groups from institutions without mandatory research training module, could clarify the direct impact of curricular research integration on student publication success. Although few of our students had publications prior to commencement of the module, prior research exposure may have influenced students’ ability to engage with the module and achieve publication success. In addition, the absence of formal resilience training leaves students without structured support for navigating common challenges such as manuscript rejection or data limitations. These constraints may disproportionately affect students from under-resourced backgrounds, thereby limiting equitable participation in research. Also, our study did not address the limited institutional access to advanced AI-driven tools, bioinformatics platforms, and premium research software that may have constrained the scope of student projects, particularly in data-intensive or lab-based fields (30, 31). Most student publications were non-laboratory in nature, potentially reflecting these infrastructural limitations. Expanding access to AI research assistants and analytical platforms could support more diverse and cutting-edge student research in the future. Another limitation is regarding the limited library resources and journal access that represent a significant infrastructural constraint. Unlike top-tier institutions with broad access to high-impact journals, students often rely on supervisors’ personal credentials to retrieve essential articles. This limitation directly affected the depth and quality of student research, as systematic literature reviews and high-quality meta-analyses require comprehensive access to full-text articles across multiple databases. Expanding institutional subscriptions and fostering international library collaborations are recommended to strengthen research capacity. Also, while prior studies suggest that undergraduate research participation correlates with sustained academic productivity, further longitudinal studies tracking research output five to ten years post-graduation are necessary to determine whether early publication success translates into continued academic and professional research involvement. Another key limitation is the apparent lack of formal institutional mechanisms to support article processing charges (APCs). In many cases, students may need to self-fund or rely on their supervisors to cover publication fees, which can pose a significant barrier, particularly for those without access to external funding or affiliation with well-resourced research groups. This financial constraint could discourage students from pursuing publication, even when their projects are of publishable quality. Future initiatives might explore options such as APC waivers, targeted funding support, or partnerships with journals to promote more equitable opportunities for student research dissemination. Future Directions Building upon the findings of this study, several key areas warrant further investigation and programmatic development to enhance the role of research in undergraduate medical education. First, a structured longitudinal tracking system should be implemented to assess the long-term impact of undergraduate research participation. By integrating ORCID, Scopus, and institutional databases, future studies could monitor research engagement beyond the immediate post-graduation period, providing a clearer picture of career trajectories and continued academic contributions. Understanding whether early research exposure influences postgraduate specialty choices, academic career aspirations, or engagement in translational research would be particularly valuable. Additionally, embedding team-based research learning models where students collaborate in multidisciplinary groups across different academic years and disciplines could foster deeper engagement and peer learning, drawing upon Wenger’s Communities of Practice framework (32). Finally, future research should focus on understanding the socio-cultural factors that influence students' engagement with research. Applying Bourdieu’s concept of academic capital, future studies could explore how institutional prestige, research environment, and access to social networks shape research participation. Incorporating insights from Self-Determination Theory which emphasizes autonomy, competence, and relatedness could help identify intrinsic and extrinsic motivators that drive students toward sustained research involvement. While the study highlights strong student research output, it does not address the barriers faced by those who did not publish. Limited engagement among some students may reflect disparities in mentorship, unequal access to research opportunities, or differences in perceived institutional support. To investigate these potential factors, a follow-up study has been initiated, involving a survey of students across all cohorts. CONCLUSION This study highlights the significant impact of an integrated research module on medical students’ research engagement and publication output, reinforcing the role of structured research training in shaping future clinician-scientists. By embedding research as a core curricular component, the module fosters scientific literacy, critical thinking, and evidence-based decision-making, essential competencies for medical professionals in an increasingly complex healthcare landscape. Our findings highlight the importance of early exposure to research, with prior research experience, mentorship, and access to institutional resources emerging as key determinants of student success in scholarly publishing. Framed through Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, research training functions as a democratizing force in academic medicine by enhancing students’ epistemic authority and symbolic capital. Complementary frameworks, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, Bernstein’s Code Theory, and Coleman’s Social Capital Theory, further explain how structured mentorship, academic networks, and institutional scaffolding contribute to research competence and productivity. Additionally, academic resilience is identified as a crucial determinant of sustained engagement in scholarly activity. To build on these findings, future institutional strategies should focus on expanding institutional access to research databases, integrating AI-driven analytics, strengthening mentorship programs, and establishing financial support mechanisms for student publications. Furthermore, longitudinal studies tracking students’ research engagement beyond graduation would provide valuable insights into the long-term impact of early research training on academic and professional trajectories. Given these findings, implementing structured change management strategies will be essential for overcoming institutional barriers and ensuring sustainable research training. Mento’s Change Management Model, which emphasizes the assessment, planning, implementation, and reinforcement of institutional change, provides a relevant framework for addressing these challenges (33). By aligning research curriculum enhancements with Mento’s staged approach, institutions can systematically evaluate existing limitations, engage key stakeholders, introduce targeted interventions, and ensure continuous adaptation through feedback-driven refinement. This strategic approach will be critical in ensuring that the evolving research module remains responsive to student needs, institutional constraints, and global advancements in medical education. In conclusion, this study reinforces the transformative role of structured research integration in medical education, demonstrating how a well-designed research module can bridge the gap between knowledge acquisition and scholarly contribution. As medical education evolves to meet the demands of a rapidly advancing healthcare ecosystem, ensuring equitable, sustainable, and high-quality research training remains a fundamental priority in cultivating the next generation of clinician-scientists. Abbreviations MBRU - Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health, Dubai ISSN – International Standard Serial Number PMID – PubMed Identifier PMCID – PubMed Central Identifier IRB – Institutional Review Board MD- Doctor of Medicine IF- Impact Factor CS – CiteScore ZPD - Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development LPP - Lave and Wenger’s Legitimate Peripheral Participation model DSREC - Dubai Scientific Research Ethics Committee APC - Article Processing Charges Declarations 7.1 Ethics approval and consent to participate The study was approved by the relevant MBRU IRB Committee (Reference #MBRU IRB-2023-54) and by the Dubai Scientific Research Ethics Committee (DSREC), Dubai Health Authority (DSREC-06/2024_17). Consent to participate: 'Not applicable' because our study involved analysis of publicly available data from published articles. No human participants or personal data were involved, as the study focused on quantifying the research output of undergraduate medical students at our university. This study involved analysis of data extracted from already published articles in the public domain. No individual-level or sensitive human data were used, and thus, compliance with the Helsinki Declaration were not required. 7.2 Consent for publication Need for consent was deemed unnecessary by the MBRU IRB Committee. 7.3 Availability of data and materials The datasets analysed during the current study are not publicly available, as they are derived from internal institutional records and summaries of published articles. The data has not been publicly shared in order to protect the privacy of our students. However, the authors have no objections to sharing the dataset upon reasonable request. 7.4 Competing Interests The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. 7.5 Funding The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The authors would like to thank Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, UAE, for payment of the article processing charges. 7.6 Authors’ contributions AH, methodology, investigation, data curation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. SS, writing original draft, writing-review and editing. FE, writing original draft, writing-review and editing. RH, writing original draft, writing-review and editing. SDP, writing original draft, writing-review and editing, funding acquisition. YB, methodology, writing original draft, writing-review and editing. TL, writing original draft, writing-review and editing. AK, methodology, formal analysis, data curation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. AJA, project administration, conceptualization, methodology, data curation, supervision, final approval of the manuscript, writing-original draft, review and editing, data curation; funding acquisition. 7.7 Acknowledgments We would like to thank Professor Jeyaseelan Lakshmana for his invaluable support in facilitating the didactic sessions for the integrated research curriculum at the College of Medicine, MBRU. We would also like to thank Ahmed Alaa Hegazy and Julia-Laura Schulz for their contributions in the manuscript. 8 Clinical Trial Number Not applicable. References Carnell B. Towards a connected curriculum in architectural education: research-based education in practice. Charrette. 2017;4(1):14-26. Ebert C, Schneider T, Stapenhorst C. Undergraduate Research in Architecture. In: Mieg HA, Ambos E, Brew A, Galli D, Lehmann J, editors. The Cambridge Handbook of Undergraduate Research. Cambridge Handbooks in Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022. p. 355-62. Salam A, Hamzah JC, Chin TG, Siraj HH, Idrus R, Mohamad N, et al. Undergraduate Medical Education Research in Malaysia: Time for a Change. Pak J Med Sci. 2015;31(3):499-503. Ávila MJ, Rodríguez-Restrepo A. The importance of research in undergraduate medical education. Medwave. 2014;14(10). Mokhtari B, Badalzadeh R, Ghaffarifar S. The next generation of physician-researchers: undergraduate medical students' and residents' attitudes, challenges, and approaches towards addressing them. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):1313. Bhuiya T, Makaryus AN. The Importance of Engaging in Scientific Research during Medical Training. Int J Angiol. 2023;32(3):153-7. Larson EB. How can clinicians incorporate research advances into practice? J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S20-4. den Bakker CR, Ommering BW, van Leeuwen TN, Dekker FW, De Beaufort AJ. Assessing publication rates from medical students' mandatory research projects in the Netherlands: a follow-up study of 10 cohorts of medical students. BMJ Open. 2022;12(4):e056053. Waaijer CJF, Ommering BWC, van der Wurff LJ, van Leeuwen TN, Dekker FW. Scientific activity by medical students: the relationship between academic publishing during medical school and publication careers after graduation. Perspect Med Educ. 2019;8(4):223-9. Lee GSJ, Chin YH, Jiang AA, Mg CH, Nistala KRY, Iyer SG, et al. Teaching Medical Research to Medical Students: a Systematic Review. Med Sci Educ. 2021;31(2):945-62. Mass-Hernández LM, Acevedo-Aguilar LM, Lozada-Martínez ID, Osorio-Agudelo LS, Maya-Betancourth J, Paz-Echeverry OA, et al. Undergraduate research in medicine: A summary of the evidence on problems, solutions and outcomes. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022;74:103280. Research MoHEaS. Evaluation Framework for Universities and Risk Matrix: Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research; 2024 [Available from: https://www.caa.ae/PORTALGUIDELINES/Outcomes-based%20Evaluation%20Framework%20for%20HEIs%20and%20Risk%20Matrix.pdf. Otaki F, AlHashmi D, Khamis AH, Azar AJ. Investigating the evolution of undergraduate medical students' perception and performance in relation to an innovative curriculum-based research module: A convergent mixed methods study launching the 8A-Model. PLoS One. 2023;18(1):e0280310. Naidoo N, Azar AJ, Khamis AH, Gholami M, Lindsbro M, Alsheikh-Ali A, et al. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Distance Learning Framework to Adapt to the Changing Landscape of Anatomy Instruction in Medical Education During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Proof-of-Concept Study. Front Public Health. 2021;9:726814. Azar AJ, Khamis AH, Naidoo N, Lindsbro M, Boukhaled JH, Gonuguntla S, et al. Design, Implementation and Evaluation of a Distance Learning Framework to Expedite Medical Education during COVID-19 pandemic: A Proof-of-Concept Study. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2021;8:23821205211000349. Touissi Y, Boulaich O, El Idrissi FE, Hjiej G, Stitou O, Belakbyer H, et al. Medical students' contribution to research; the scientific output of medical theses held in Moroccan medical schools during the last decade (2011-2021). Med Educ Online. 2023;28(1):2218677. Bourdieu P, Passeron J-C. Reproduction in education, society and culture, 2nd ed. Nice R, editor. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc; 1990. xxvi, 254-xxvi, p. Keim SM, Howse D, Bracke P, Mendoza K. Promoting evidence based medicine in preclinical medical students via a federated literature search tool. Med Teach. 2008;30(9-10):880-4. Healey M, Jenkins A. Developing Undergraduate Research and Inquiry. 2009. Bates J, Ellaway RH. Mapping the dark matter of context: a conceptual scoping review. Med Educ. 2016;50(8):807-16. Sanders D, Welk DS. Strategies to scaffold student learning: applying Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development. Nurse Educ. 2005;30(5):203-7. Lave J, Wenger E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. Singh P. Pedagogising Knowledge: Bernstein’s Theory of the Pedagogic Device. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 2002;23. Rogošić S, Baranović B. Social Capital and Educational Achievements: Coleman vs. Bourdieu. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal. 2016;6:81-100. Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action. Boston: Beacon Press 1984. Griffin MF, Hindocha S. Publication practices of medical students at British medical schools: experience, attitudes and barriers to publish. Med Teach. 2011;33(1):e1-8. Ejaz K, Shamim MS, Shamim MS, Hussain SA. Involvement of medical students and fresh medical graduates of Karachi, Pakistan in research. J Pak Med Assoc. 2011;61(2):115-20. Bonilla-Escobar FJ, Bonilla-Velez J, Tobón-García D, Ángel-Isaza AM. Medical student researchers in Colombia and associated factors with publication: a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(1):254. Solomon SS, Tom SC, Pichert J, Wasserman D, Powers AC. Impact of medical student research in the development of physician-scientists. J Investig Med. 2003;51(3):149-56. Tóth B, Berek L, Gulácsi L, Péntek M, Zrubka Z. Automation of systematic reviews of biomedical literature: a scoping review of studies indexed in PubMed. Systematic Reviews. 2024;13(1):174. Narayanan S, Ramakrishnan R, Durairaj E, Das A. Artificial Intelligence Revolutionizing the Field of Medical Education. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e49604. Wenger E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998. Banerjee Y, Tuffnell C, Alkhadragy R. Mento’s change model in teaching competency-based medical education. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19(1):472. Tables Table 1: Delivery Timeline of Research Module Courses by Phase, Year, and Cohort 1 Phase Year Semester Research course credit hours Research course complexity level Course Duration (weeks) Research Curriculum Years of research course delivery Cohort 2022 Cohort 2023 Phase 1 Normal structure function and behaviour Year 1 Sem 1 1 Foundational 20 Theoretical foundations of research methodology and biostatistics 2016 2017 Sem 2 1 Foundational 20 Continuation of foundational concepts using active learning strategies. 2017 2018 Phase 2 Abnormal structure function and behaviour Year 2 Sem 3 2 Reinforcement 20 Intermediate research training: students select projects from a vetted list. 2017 2018 Sem 4 2 Independent research project with supervision 20 Students begin independent research under faculty supervision. 2018 2019 Year 3 Sem 5 3 Independent research project with supervision 20 Completion and presentation of research 2018 2019 Sem 6 - Application of research skills in clinical practice 20 Research consolidation and clinical readiness 2019-2022 (Graduation June 2022) 2020-2023 (Graduation June 2023 Phase 3 Clinical practice Years 4-6 Sem 7-12 - Application in clinical setting 120 Integration of research in clinical practice Follow-up duration (as of December 31, 2023) 2 7.5 years 6.5 years Legend Table 1: No, number; Sem, semester. 1 The MBRU undergraduate medical program spans six years and it’s structured across three phases: Phase 1 (Year 1) and Phase 2 (Years 2-3) deliver pre-clinical basic sciences, while Phase 3 (Years 4-6) focuses on clinical clerkships. The curriculum follows a spiral structure with integrated courses that revisit subjects at increasing complexity. As part of this structure, five sequential integrated research courses are delivered in Phases 1 and 2 during the first five semesters, totaling 9 credit hours. The first cohort commenced in August 2016 and graduated in June 2022, while the second cohort began in August 2017 and graduated in 2023. 2 Research productivity time was measured up to a fixed endpoint of December 31, 2023, corresponding to 7.5 years of follow-up for Cohort 2022 and 6.5 years for Cohort 2023. Table 2: Summary of the Twenty-Six Variables Included in the Study Database. Scholarly Metrics Variable Description 1. Author information Student name Graduation year ORCID 2. Authorship details Authorship position of the student Student as corresponding author Total number of authors in the publication Affiliation of principle investigator with MBRU 3. Study details Study title Study type Research study part of the dissertation curriculum 4. Journal information Journal name Year of publication Journal Impact factor Journal CiteScore Journal Quartile rank on SCImago Percentile ranking of the journal within its field 5. Publication details Citation of the publication Digital Object Identifier (DOI) International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) PubMed Identifier (PMID) PubMed Central Identifier (PMCID) 6. Citation metrics Number of citations of the publication on Scopus Number of citations of the publication on Google Scholar 7. Publisher information Publisher of the journal 8. Grant funding Grant-funding received (through internal or external grants) 9. Institutional and funding information Institutional Review Board (IRB) was applicable and obtained Table 3: Publication Output of Medical Students Graduating in 2022 (N=49) and 2023 (N=35), Covering Publications from September 1, 2016 to December 31, 2023 1 Scholarly Metrix Cohort 2022 n (%) Cohort 2023 n (%) Total N (%) Research projects students were involved in 2 235 86 321 Published research projects 196 63 259 Publications removing duplicates 131 45 169 3 Students as first author 49 (37.4) 23 (51.1) 72 (42.6) Students as corresponding authors 18 (13.7) 9 (20.0) 27 (15.9) Publications with Principal Investigator from College of Medicine 36 (27.5) 16 (35.6) 49 (29.0) Authors per publication, median [range] 6 [1-63] 5 [2-28] 5 [1-63] PMID 105 (80.2) 35 (77.8) 133 (78.7) PMCID 83 (63.4) 25 (55.6) 104 (61.5) Publications requiring IRB approval 17 (13.0) 12 (26.7) 27 (16.0) Publications receiving funding 19 (14.5) 11 (24.4) 29 (17.2) Number of students per Cohort 49 35 84 Students who did not publish 11 (22.4) 14 (40.0) 25 (29.8) Students with ≥ 1 publication 38 (77.6) 21 (60.0) 59 (70.2) Students with exactly 1 publication 11 (28.9) 9 (42.9) 20 (33.9) Students with exactly 2 publications 11 (28.9) 4 (19.0) 15 (25.4) Students with 3-6 publications 10 (26.3) 5 (23.8) 15 (25.4) Students with ≥7 publications 6 (15.8) 3 (14.3) 9 (15.3) Students with ORCID 24 (49) 10 (28.6) 34 (40.5) Students who published their curricular dissertation 10 (20.4) 11 (31.4) 21 (25.0) 1 First graduating cohorts that were enrolled in the Doctor of Medicine (MD), College of Medicine (CoM), Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. At the time of this study there were only two graduating cohorts (2022 and 2023). 2 Each student may have multiple publications, resulting in the total number of publications exceeding the number of students in the cohort. 3 Seven duplicate articles were identified across the two graduating cohorts, leaving a total of 169 unique publications in the database. PMID, PubMed Identifier; PMCID, PubMed Central Identifier; ORCID, Open Researcher and Contributor ID; MD, Doctor of Medicine; CoM, College of Medicine; MBRU, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences; IRB, institutional review board. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6911251","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":496833931,"identity":"a0eb8661-4a57-47bc-8dc3-4f5e9f43467e","order_by":0,"name":"Ayatullah Hegazy","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ayatullah","middleName":"","lastName":"Hegazy","suffix":""},{"id":496833932,"identity":"c41aadd9-a059-4cb0-8df6-4468301fb97c","order_by":1,"name":"Saad Syed","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Saad","middleName":"","lastName":"Syed","suffix":""},{"id":496833934,"identity":"49d6fabd-a32e-4c26-a91a-b9184764c3c5","order_by":2,"name":"Farah Ennab","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Farah","middleName":"","lastName":"Ennab","suffix":""},{"id":496833936,"identity":"fc613d4d-9e8a-4d9c-ae2f-b1f4e6bec38e","order_by":3,"name":"Reem Hatem","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Reem","middleName":"","lastName":"Hatem","suffix":""},{"id":496833937,"identity":"6d9f81e5-4ea5-4b32-b31b-8aca4204d014","order_by":4,"name":"Stefan S. Du Plessis","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Stefan","middleName":"S.","lastName":"Du Plessis","suffix":""},{"id":496833938,"identity":"2e3a3c56-a5f3-4cc2-b34f-97f1d62e3d36","order_by":5,"name":"Yajnavalka Banerjee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yajnavalka","middleName":"","lastName":"Banerjee","suffix":""},{"id":496833939,"identity":"e634751e-358e-46c1-8a02-31c80c0e7703","order_by":6,"name":"Tom Loney","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tom","middleName":"","lastName":"Loney","suffix":""},{"id":496833941,"identity":"f4086136-5757-4ab4-8b06-9dade9ed2f2e","order_by":7,"name":"Amar Khamis","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Amar","middleName":"","lastName":"Khamis","suffix":""},{"id":496833942,"identity":"d1ce103d-de9f-4705-a61f-1bb5f801abbf","order_by":8,"name":"Aida J. Azar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aida","middleName":"J.","lastName":"Azar","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-06-17 07:08:23","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6911251/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6911251/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":88890801,"identity":"07808e53-4a3b-4632-9d16-0c48a600def9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-12 12:47:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":51187,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDistribution of Student Publications by Study Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLegend Figure 1: This figure shows the distribution of undergraduate medical student publications from the College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), published between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, categorized by study design. Non–peer-reviewed publications including editorials, letters to the editor, commentaries, abstracts, protocols, and short communications accounted for the highest number, followed by descriptive studies\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6911251/v1/0bfb5d0fcbca3d2057c9620d.jpg"},{"id":88890802,"identity":"ce98d006-31be-4e23-8e76-5821ad45d88d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-12 12:47:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":36847,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDistribution of Student Publications by Journal Impact Factor and CiteScore\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLegend Figure 2: This figure shows the distribution of undergraduate medical student publications from the College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), published between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, based on the journal Impact Factor and CiteScore. For both metrics, most articles were published in journals with a score greater than 3.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6911251/v1/4e0b5c51a2a0f5034dee7ff9.jpg"},{"id":88893271,"identity":"11ff4586-dc26-4a46-bf34-c6cd49ba73ed","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-12 12:55:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":39804,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDistribution of Student Publications by Quartiles on Scopus or SCImago\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLegend Figure 3: This figure shows the distribution of undergraduate medical student publications from the College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), published between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, according to journal quartile rankings based on Scopus or SCImago. Most articles were published in Q1 or Q2 journals.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6911251/v1/6d0be55941659e11da60af7c.jpg"},{"id":88890811,"identity":"5f0046a4-7cc0-4d9a-9055-f2c3c0e2d211","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-12 12:47:14","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":49780,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDistribution of Student Publications by Number of Citations on Scopus and Google Scholar\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLegend Figure 4: This figure shows the distribution of undergraduate medical student publications from the College of Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), published between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, based on the number of citations recorded in Scopus and Google Scholar. Most articles received between 1 and 10 citations on both platforms. Citation data were accessed between January and November 2024.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6911251/v1/e6ac794e22a96143a6665c79.jpg"},{"id":88894705,"identity":"a7d2ebf6-2c4b-4c3f-9f58-09cf7539eaeb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-12 13:03:14","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44420,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnnual Distribution of Student and College of Medicine Publications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLegend Figure 5: Stacked bar chart illustrating the annual peer-reviewed publication output of the College of Medicine (CoM), Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Light blue segments represent publications co-authored with medical students, while the combined height of the light and dark blue segments reflects the total number of CoM publications per year. The MBRU medical university was established in 2016, with the first cohort of students enrolled in August of that year. The number of peer-reviewed student co-authored publications increased steadily from 2016 to 2020, followed by a marked rise in 2021. This increase in publication activity was sustained through 2022 and 2023, potentially reflecting the surge in research output during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was also observed across the broader CoM research landscape.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6911251/v1/af4bfb03553f3e458c3d16c4.jpg"},{"id":104882302,"identity":"e442872f-a986-45af-b820-93e723d85ab8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-18 09:29:14","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1525890,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6911251/v1/ffda6416-d7f5-4bdf-9730-c654dfbe8946.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Assessing the Impact of a Comprehensive Integrated Research Module on Medical Student Publications and Research Engagement: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Arab Emirates ","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe incorporation of research modules into undergraduate education has a long-standing history across various academic disciplines, such as architecture, engineering, and social sciences, where they promote creativity, critical analysis, and evidence-based practice (1, 2). Similarly in medical education, research modules are effective in fostering analytical skills and scientific inquiry, which are crucial for evidence based clinical practice. Salam et al. showed that mandatory undergraduate research projects in the medical curriculum bridge the gap between education and practice, demonstrating how structured research initiatives can cultivate skills that are directly transferable to professional environments, enhancing both academic and career readiness (3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the context of the current rapidly evolving and dynamic medical landscape, the integration of research into undergraduate medical education is crucial for addressing the global deficit of physician-scientists\u0026nbsp;who are essential for advancing medical practice and innovation. Research not only enhances educational experience but also plays a crucial role in fostering a sustained interest in research (4, 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe benefits of research extend across multiple domains. For patients, research leads to improved care outcomes through the creation of novel therapies and the application of evidence-based medicine, ensuring that clinical decisions are rooted in the latest scientific knowledge (6). The integration of research into clinical practice empowers clinicians to stay abreast of emerging advances, refine therapeutic precision, and adopt new treatments judiciously, ensuring optimal patient care (7). As for medical trainees, engaging in research cultivates critical thinking skills, enhances clinical reasoning, and broadens career prospects, contributing to greater professional satisfaction (6).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt has been shown that mandatory undergraduate project such as those at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, foster a culture of research and help students develop essential skills ranging from project design to final reporting (3). Moreover, Otaki et al. conducted a study investigating undergraduate medical students' perceptions of an integrated research module. The findings revealed that students began to appreciate the modules challenges as they recognized its value, and understanding advanced significantly once they started conducting research (10). Similarly, findings by Bakker et al. further supports this, showing that hands-on mandatory research projects at Leiden University Medical Center, combined with flexible learning pathways, lead to significant research output and can serve as a springboard for a research-oriented career (8). \u0026nbsp;Moreover, a study by Waaijer et al. demonstrated that students who published during medical school were twice as likely to publish afterward, highlighting the long-term benefits of early research engagement (9).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite the widespread adoption of research courses in medical programs, a significant gap still remains in understanding the sustained impact of students’ research involvement during their clinical years \u0026nbsp;and its potential long-term effects on their careers (10, 11). Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive research module on undergraduate medical students’ research productivity. Through this bibliometric registry, the study seeks to gain essential insights into the value of integrating research into the medical curriculum and its role in cultivating future clinician-scientists. Moreover, this aim aligns with the objectives outlined in the “Future of Higher Education in the United Arab Emirates, November 2024” emphasizing the quantification of student research outcome (12).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"METHODS","content":"\u003ch3\u003e3 The undergraduate medical university\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis retrospective cohort study was conducted at the College of Medicine (CoM) at Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE) (https://www.mbru.ac.ae/). This medical university, established in 2016, is less than ten years and serves as the academic partner of Dubai Health, the first integrated academic healthcare system in Dubai. Dubai Health combines medical education, research, and patient care, aiming to enhance healthcare quality by integrating academic institutions with clinical practice to train future health care physicians more effectively. The MBRU Doctor of Medicine (MD) is an undergraduate program, admitting students directly after high school without requiring a prior bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree. The first cohort of undergraduate medical students began end of August 2016. The MD curriculum is a six-year program divided into three phases, comprising 12 semesters with 2 semesters per year (Table 1). The undergraduate program at MBRU adopts a progressive approach to medical education through its \u0026lsquo;spiral\u0026rsquo; curriculum. In this approach, key concepts and topics are revisited at multiple stages throughout the six-year program, with increasing depth and complexity reinforcing learning and promoting long-term retention (13, 14).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePhases 1 and 2 of the programs, spanning Year 1 (40 weeks) and Years 2 and 3 (80 weeks), emphasize basic biomedical and behavioral sciences such as anatomy, biochemistry, pharmacology, microbiology, and research methods. Year 1 establishes foundational knowledge, while clinical context is introduced through early exposure to healthcare settings. In Years 2 and 3, students advance to the study of pathophysiology, diagnostics, and therapeutics using case-based learning, alongside clinical skills training in communication, physical examination, diagnostic reasoning, and patient management.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese courses provide students with a strong foundation as they transition into Phase 3 (Years 4, 5 and 6), involving clinical clerkship (15). Phase 3 (120 weeks) is delivered primarily in clinical settings, offering direct patient care experiences, supplemented by case discussions and tutorials.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e4 Structure of the Research Curriculum\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe CoM offers a unique, longitudinal research module spanning the first three years (Phases 1 and 2) of the program (13). This includes\u0026nbsp;five-integrated research courses introduced during the first five consecutive semesters of the undergraduate program, beginning when students enter the medical school. The courses cover\u0026nbsp;topics in epidemiology, biostatistics, and research methodology, with a total of 9 credit hours (Table 1). The curriculum features early vertical integration and mandates student-led research projects, with opportunities in clinical, translational, medical education, and artificial intelligence research. This approach aligns with the principles of a spiral curriculum, allowing students to progressively build on their knowledge while supporting horizontal integration with basic sciences\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research module begins in Year 1 (Phase 1) with two integrated 1-credit courses delivered in Semesters 1 and 2. These courses introduce students to epidemiology, biostatistics, and research methodology, providing a structured foundation for developing scholarly competencies (Table 1). During years 2 and 3 (spanning three semesters), research training continues with three consecutive courses of increasing complexity. It begins with a 2-credit course that reinforces foundational concepts, followed by intermediate (Semester 4, 2 credits) and advanced (Semester 5, 3 credits) courses that emphasize empirical application. These courses allow students to engage in hands-on research by designing and conducting their own studies, thereby consolidating their proficiency in research design and methodological rigor within a vertically integrated curriculum structure (Table 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs part of this integrated five-course research module, medical students engage in the conceptualization, development, and execution of their own research projects (10). Each student is assigned a dedicated research supervisor, who maybe an academic, physician, or allied health professional, and provides guidance throughout the process (13). Supervisors provide a range of research topics, from which students select according to their interests. These topics span biomedical studies (clinical or laboratory-based) as well as socio-behavioral areas such as medical education. All research projects are submitted for institutional review board approval. The module concludes with a dissertation and a conference-style poster presentation, equipping students with the skills to practice evidence-based medicine and contribute to knowledge generation. This aligns with the College of Medicine Program Learning Outcome (PLO) of our undergraduate medical university (10). While publication is not mandatory upon completion of the module, students are encouraged to continue working with their assigned supervisors to further develop and publish their research.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe preceding five-course research curriculum enables students in years 4 to 6 to apply evidence-based approaches during clerkships, including literature appraisal, clinical audits, and scholarly projects (Table 1). This vertical integration enhances students\u0026apos; ability to formulate relevant research questions, select appropriate methodologies, and engage in quality improvement initiatives throughout their clinical training.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e5 Eligibility criteria\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo be eligible for inclusion in the study, students must have graduated from the MD program. At the time the study began on June 1, 2023, only two cohorts had completed the program, Cohort 2022 and Cohort 2023, and were therefore the only groups eligible for analysis. These two graduating cohorts provided a unique opportunity to assess the impact of the research curriculum. Research impact was defined as the production of publications within a period starting from the commencement of the research module in Year 1, Semester 1 (September 1, 2016), and extending to at least six months after graduation. To assess this impact, all publications between September 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, were included in the analysis. Students who had not yet graduated by June 1, 2023, or whose publications fell outside the defined timeframe were excluded from the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e6 Tracking student research output\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA complete list of student names was obtained from the university student services department. Two authors (AH and SS) conducted a comprehensive retrieval of students\u0026rsquo; publications, including the assigned supervised student research projects, conference proceedings, protocols, pre-prints, published abstracts, and peer reviewed publications. The names were manually searched to ensure a comprehensive compilation of relevant scholarly outputs. Student publications were identified from multiple sources including ORCID, PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar. Additionally, the MBRU Al Maktoum Medical Library repository was extensively searched for any additional information. Also, students were sent an email to verify and supplement their publication records, achieving a response rate of 60%. Two authors (AH and SS) independently collected information for all publication data by searching SCOPUS and PubMed and subsequently cross-checked each other\u0026rsquo;s entries to ensure accuracy in the bibliometric registry. Any discrepancies were resolved through consensus in consultation with the study\u0026rsquo;s primary investigator (AA).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo evaluate student research impact, we first defined specific criteria for measurement, including the number of student publications and the platforms where their research was published. Using these criteria, we systematically gathered information to create a comprehensive and continuously updated bibliometric registry. This registry serves as a valuable tool to quantify student research output, assess the quality and impact of their work, and evaluate the alignment of the integrated research module the institutional goals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.5 Data collection\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSearch strategy\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe search strategy included all MBRU medical students, enrolled in the MD program from the 2022 and 2023 cohorts. All student publications produced between September 1, 2016, to December 31, 2023, were included to capture research activity both before graduation and up to 6 months (Cohort 2023) or 18 months (Cohort 2022) post-graduation. This approach aimed to provide insights into the immediate impact of the mandatory research module. Data collection was conducted between January and November 2024.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDeveloping a Bibliometric Registry of Student Research Publications\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo gain an in-depth understanding of the publication practices of our medical students, 26 variables were collected and are summarized in Table 2. These variables assess publication outcomes across several dimensions, including publication type (original articles, reviews, descriptive studies, and non-peer-reviewed works), characteristics (authorship position, timing of publication, and journal category), and quality indicators (journal indexing, impact factor, and citation metrics). These outcomes serve as measurable indicators of research skill retention and scholarly impact. Journal impact factors were obtained from Web of Science, while CiteScores were sourced from Scopus. Journal rankings were retrieved from the SCImago Journal Rank (SCImagoJR), and percentile rankings within subject fields were based on Scopus data.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003e6.6 \u0026nbsp;Statistical Analysis\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStatistical analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 29.0. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze quantitative data, while categorical data were described using frequencies and percentages. The normality of the data was assessed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test. The Chi-square test or Fisher\u0026rsquo;s Exact test were used to compare associations between categorical variables. The Mann-Whitney U Test was used for comparing independent groups when the data were continuous or ordinal, and not normally distributed. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.6 Ethical Approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the relevant MBRU IRB Committee (Reference #MBRU IRB-2023-54) and by the Dubai Scientific Research Ethics Committee (DSREC), Dubai Health Authority (DSREC-06/2024_17).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe analysis included the full population of 84 students, with 49 graduating in 2022 and 35 in 2023. Between September 1, 2016, and the fixed endpoint of December 31, 2023 (Table 3), a total of 321 student-involved research projects were identified. This period corresponds to 7.5 years of follow-up for the 2022 cohort and 6.5 years for the 2023 cohort. The 2022 cohort participated in 235 projects, resulting in 196 publications, while the 2023 cohort was involved in 86 projects, yielding 63 publications. After removing duplicates, 131 unique publications remained for the 2022 cohort and 45 to the 2023 cohort. Seven publications were co-authored by students from both cohorts, resulting in a final total of 169 unique student-authored publications in the database 2023 (Table 3).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePublication identifiers were analyzed, revealing 133 articles (78.7%) had a PMID, while 104 (61.5%) had a PMCID. No significant differences were observed between the cohorts regarding the presence of PMIDs or PMCIDs. Additionally, 34 students (40.5%) had an ORCID iD. \u0026nbsp;Regarding authorship positions, 72 publications (42.6%) had students as first authors, with 49 (37.4%) publications from cohort 2022 and 23 (51.1%) from the 2023 cohort. Additionally, 54 student research included two or more students as authors. For corresponding authorship, 27 (15.9%) of students were listed, with 18 students (13.7%) from the 2022 cohort and 9 (20.0%) from the 2023 cohort. A total of 49 (29.0%) articles had a principal investigator from MBRU. Additionally, 29 (17.2%) received internal (MBRU) or external (non-MBRU) funding, with 19 (14.5%) for cohort 2022 and 11 (24.4%) for cohort 2023 (Table 3). The data did not differ significantly between cohrots.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmong the total research projects undertaken by the students in both cohorts, 59 students (70.2%) had at least one publication, with 38 (77.6%) from the 2022 cohort and 21 (60.0%) from the 2023 cohort (Table 3). For students who published, the median number of publications was 2.0 per student in both cohorts.\u0026nbsp;A total of 25 (29.8%) students did not publish any research, including 11 (22.4%) students from the 2022 cohort and 14 (40.0%) students from the 2023 cohort. Table 3 categorizes the students who published based on the number of publications: 20 students (33.9%) had only one publication, 15 (25.4%) had two publications, 15 (25.4%) had three to six publications, and 9 (15.3%) had seven or more. Additionally, 21 students (25.0%) published their curricular dissertation as part of the research module course, with 10 students (20.4%) from the 2022 cohort and 11 students (31.4%) from 2023 cohort. The difference in publication rates of curricular dissertations between the two cohorts was not statistically significant (Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudents contributed to a diverse range of study designs (Figure 1). Most publications across both cohorts were editorials, letters, commentaries, abstracts, protocols or short communications, comprising 65 (38.5%) of total publications. Cohort 2022 contributed significantly more with 54 publications (41.2%) compared to 8 (17.8%) from cohort 2023 (p = 0.0047). Descriptive studies were also common, with case reports (21 publications, 12.4%) and cross-sectional studies (27 publications, 16.0%). Cohort 2023 contributed more to this type of publications (p = 0.0093). As for analytical studies, including case control studies (6 publications, 3.6%), cohort studies (8 publications, 4.7%), and experimental studies (8 publications, 4.7%), were less common. Similarly, review articles such as non-systematic reviews (10 publications, 5.9%), systematic reviews (10 publications, 5.9%), and meta-analysis (9 publications, 5.3%), were less frequent. A few publications were book chapters (3 publications, 1.8%), with no statistically significant differences between cohorts. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 2 illustrates the distribution of publications based on the Impact Factor of the journal in which they were published: 6 (3.6%) articles appeared in journals with an Impact Factor (IF) of \u0026lt;1, 10 articles (5.9%) in journals with an IF of 1 to 2, 15 articles (8.9%) in journals with and an IF of 2 to 3 and 59 articles (34.9%) in journals with an IF of 3 or higher. Similarly, the CiteScore (CS) of journals where articles were published was extracted from Scopus: 11 (6.5%) articles were published in journals with a CS of \u0026lt;1, 17 (10.1%) in those with CS of 1 to 2, 11 (6.5%) in those with CS of 2 to 3 and 88 (52.1%) had a CS of 3 or more (Figure 2).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 3 displays the distribution of articles according to the Quartile of the journals they were published in on both Scopus or SCImago with 120 (71.0%) publications in either Q1 or Q2 journals: 68 (40.2%) in Q1 journals and 52 (30.8%) in Q2. As for Q3 journals there were 37 (21.9%) and 11 (6.5%) in Q4. Figure 4 shows the distribution of articles published by number of citations on Scopus and Google Scholar. The median number of citations on Scopus was 2 ranging from 0 to 186, and the median number of citations on Google Scholars was 3 ranging from 0 to 318.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 5 highlights the indexed, peer-reviewed student co-authored publications (n = 110) as a subset of the total publications produced by the CoM (n = 850) from the establishment of MBRU on September 1, 2016, to fixed endpoint of December 31, 2023. No student publications were recorded in 2016 as students had not yet started their research module. Overall, students contributed to 13% of the CoM total research output during this period. A notable rise in student publications was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with output increasing from 11 in 2020 to 30 in 2021, mirroring a broader increase in CoM research activity.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eIntegrating a mandatory research module into the core curriculum of the CoM at MBRU had a substantial impact on student publication productivity, significantly contributing to the overall scholarly output of the college. Notably, more than 70% of students had at least one publication, and a quarter achieved more than three publications within up to one year after graduation. Additionally, a quarter of the students published their curricular dissertations, highlighting the mandatory research module\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness in fostering research productivity among young medical students. \u0026nbsp;Remarkably, these publication rates far exceeded those reported by other medical institutions, where only 0.8% of theses submitted resulted in peer-reviewed publications, 54.2 % of which were led by students (16). No studies have explored the quality of undergraduate student publications in mandatory curriculums. However, our study investigated the quality of student research, with more than one-third of the articles published in journals with an impact factor of three or higher. Most of these publications appeared in Q1 and Q2 journals, reflecting the module\u0026rsquo;s success in enhancing students\u0026apos; research capabilities and enabling them to achieve their first peer-reviewed publication. Importantly, our study focused on student-authored publications that followed their completion of the integrated research module, strengthening the likelihood that their research productivity was a direct result of the mandatory component. This study showed that collaboration also played a role in this success. Students who formed groups and worked on research projects together were noted to have an increased likelihood of publishing multiple projects, showing the importance of collaboration with peers. Additionally, students from both cohorts collaborated on seven publications, highlighting the role of senior students in mentoring their peers and creating research opportunities.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA broader theoretical lens allows for a more nuanced understanding of these findings, positioning them within established socio-cultural frameworks. Bourdieu\u0026rsquo;s concept of cultural capital provides a compelling lens through which to interpret the significance of integrating structured research modules in medical education (17). Cultural capital embodied in scientific literacy, research skills, and the ability to engage with scholarly discourse acts as a powerful determinant of professional and academic success. In the context of medical education, the acquisition of research experience is not merely an additive skill but a transformative process that confers epistemic authority, enhances cognitive flexibility, and fosters deeper engagement with evidence-based practice (18, 19). This aligns with Bourdieu\u0026rsquo;s notion of field, where academic medicine functions as a structured social space in which individuals navigate power relations through accumulated capital. By embedding a research-intensive curriculum, institutions effectively democratize access to cultural capital, thereby reducing disparities in research engagement and publication rates (20). Furthermore, the findings from this study, particularly the high percentage of student publications in Q1 and Q2 journals demonstrate how institutionalized research curricula act as mechanisms for symbolic capital acquisition, legitimizing students\u0026rsquo; positions within the broader scientific community.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eComplementary socio-cultural theories further substantiate the significance of these findings. Vygotsky\u0026rsquo;s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), underscores the role of structured mentorship and peer collaboration in accelerating students\u0026rsquo; research competency (21). By facilitating guided participation in scholarly work, the research module enables students to transition from peripheral to full participation in the academic field, reinforcing Lave and Wenger\u0026rsquo;s Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) model within communities of practice (22). This dynamic aligns with Bernstein\u0026rsquo;s Code Theory, which suggests that access to specialized knowledge (in this case, research training) is a function of institutional structuring that determines the distribution of epistemic capital (23). The presence of structured mentorship and peer networks further aligns with Coleman\u0026rsquo;s Social Capital Theory, which emphasizes that academic success is contingent on the quality of relational networks and the ability to leverage these connections for skill acquisition and professional growth (24).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, Habermas\u0026rsquo; Theory of Communicative Action provides insight into the ways in which research training fosters a discourse-oriented learning environment (25). Engaging in research and academic publishing exposes students to a participatory, dialogic mode of knowledge construction, where they actively contribute to the scientific community rather than passively consuming information. This perspective reinforces the argument that the research module not only enhances individual competencies but also cultivates an ethos of collaborative knowledge production within the medical education system. Taken together, these theoretical frameworks provide a robust socio-cultural justification for the structured integration of research in medical curricula, illustrating how research engagement functions as both an educational tool and a social mechanism for fostering professional identity, academic mobility, and long-term career advancement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy incorporating this research module, we provided students with the opportunity to participate in more research projects by connecting them to mentors at the university and within the Dubai healthcare systems who have research opportunities, allowing them to contribute significantly to the college\u0026rsquo;s research output. This outcome can be attributed to students developing an interest in ongoing research projects or initiating new collaborations with principal investigators at the university, as demonstrated by our findings.\u0026nbsp;Although university supervisors were involved in only a quarter of the research projects, adjunct faculty based in hospitals were not accounted for due to the continuously changing faculty list. As a result, the impact of mentorship from investigators, whether within the university or affiliated institutions, is likely underestimated. Furthermore, all mentors received structured guidelines and ongoing support through an open-door initiative with the core team, ensuring that challenges were addressed promptly. Both students and supervisors also had access to a weekly research clinic, providing a regular opportunity to seek advice and guidance from the core team.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSeveral studies have identified barriers regarding student publications, including lack of knowledge and training about the publication process. For instance, one study showed that 92% of the students at British medical schools agreed they would not be able to submit a paper without supervision (26). Ejaz et al. showed in their study that 41% of undergraduate medical students have participated in research projects, mostly during the data collection process or computer work only (27). Additionally, the absence of mentorship was highlighted as a significant obstacle for students undertaking research projects (28). \u0026nbsp;Integrating the research module early in the curriculum addresses these challenges by exposing students to the research environment and equipping them with essential skills, such as scientific writing, data analysis, and article publishing. This foundation fosters confidence in approaching supervisors, engaging in collaborative writing, analyzing data, and presenting or publishing research findings. Notably, our results revealed that 72 publications were led by students as first authors. By assigning supervisors to guide students through their first research projects, we ensure they receive critical mentorship and skill development. While many students initially considered the module challenging, Otaki et al. reported an increase in interest toward research as medical students progressed and began applying \u0026nbsp;the learned concepts in their own research studies (13). Similarly, den Bakker, et al. noted an increase in inclination towards a research-oriented career after mandatory research projects (8). This aligns with findings from another study showing that research participation increases students\u0026apos; interest in academic careers and further opportunities, such as publishing and presenting their work (29).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIntegrating a mandatory research module into the curriculum significantly enhanced student research productivity, as evidenced by substantial publication output, high-quality publications in reputable journals, and an increased interest in pursuing careers as clinician-scientists. This success highlights the importance of early exposure to research and structured mentorship in fostering a culture of scientific inquiry among medical students. Establishing a sustainable bibliometric research registry is essential for analyzing the types of research produced by students. Such a registry would enable the evaluation of their contributions to evidence-based medical practice. Furthermore, analyzing this data provides tangible evidence of the mandatory research module\u0026apos;s effectiveness, support continuous program improvement, and enhance the program\u0026apos;s external recognition. By leveraging these insights, the module continues to cultivate future clinician-scientists and strengthen its impact on medical education. Moreover, this highlights the broader significance of the research module in advancing national and educational priorities to shape the future of higher education in the UAE by meeting the research outcome requirements for universities. This aligns with the \u0026ldquo;Future of Higher Education in the United Arab Emirates, November 2024\u0026rdquo; that recently published a policy promoting undergraduate student research (12).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLimitations\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides valuable insights into student research productivity following the integration of a mandatory research module, several limitations should be considered. First, the observational nature of the study limits the ability to establish causal inferences between the module and research productivity. While the findings demonstrate an increase in student-led publications, evidenced by publication volume, quality metrics, and journal ranking, these outcomes may also be influenced by factors such as student motivation, prior academic achievement, or the broader institutional research environment. Future prospective studies with control groups from institutions without mandatory research training module, could clarify the direct impact of curricular research integration on student publication success. Although few of our students had publications prior to commencement of the module, prior research exposure may have influenced students\u0026rsquo; ability to engage with the module and achieve publication success.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition, the absence of formal resilience training leaves students without structured support for navigating common challenges such as manuscript rejection or data limitations. These constraints may disproportionately affect students from under-resourced backgrounds, thereby limiting equitable participation in research. Also, our study did not address the limited institutional access to advanced AI-driven tools, bioinformatics platforms, and premium research software that may have constrained the scope of student projects, particularly in data-intensive or lab-based fields\u0026nbsp;(30, 31). Most student publications were non-laboratory in nature, potentially reflecting these infrastructural limitations. Expanding access to AI research assistants and analytical platforms could support more diverse and cutting-edge student research in the future. Another limitation is regarding the limited library resources and journal access that represent a significant infrastructural constraint. Unlike top-tier institutions with broad access to high-impact journals, students often rely on supervisors\u0026rsquo; personal credentials to retrieve essential articles. This limitation directly affected the depth and quality of student research, as systematic literature reviews and high-quality meta-analyses require comprehensive access to full-text articles across multiple databases. Expanding institutional subscriptions and fostering international library collaborations are recommended to strengthen research capacity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlso, while prior studies suggest that undergraduate research participation correlates with sustained academic productivity, further\u0026nbsp;longitudinal studies\u0026nbsp;tracking research output five to ten years post-graduation are necessary to determine whether early publication success translates into continued academic and professional research involvement. Another key limitation is the apparent lack of formal institutional mechanisms to support article processing charges (APCs). In many cases, students may need to self-fund or rely on their supervisors to cover publication fees, which can pose a significant barrier, particularly for those without access to external funding or affiliation with well-resourced research groups. This financial constraint could discourage students from pursuing publication, even when their projects are of publishable quality. Future initiatives might explore options such as APC waivers, targeted funding support, or partnerships with journals to promote more equitable opportunities for student research dissemination.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eFuture Directions\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBuilding upon the findings of this study, several key areas warrant further investigation and programmatic development to enhance the role of research in undergraduate medical education.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFirst, a structured longitudinal tracking system should be implemented to assess the long-term impact of undergraduate research participation. By integrating ORCID, Scopus, and institutional databases, future studies could monitor research engagement beyond the immediate post-graduation period, providing a clearer picture of career trajectories and continued academic contributions. Understanding whether early research exposure influences postgraduate specialty choices, academic career aspirations, or engagement in translational research would be particularly valuable. Additionally, embedding team-based research learning models where students collaborate in multidisciplinary groups across different academic years and disciplines could foster deeper engagement and peer learning, drawing upon Wenger\u0026rsquo;s Communities of Practice framework (32). Finally, future research should focus on understanding the\u0026nbsp;socio-cultural factors\u0026nbsp;that influence students\u0026apos; engagement with research. Applying\u0026nbsp;Bourdieu\u0026rsquo;s concept of academic capital, future studies could explore how institutional prestige, research environment, and access to social networks shape research participation. Incorporating insights from\u0026nbsp;Self-Determination Theory which emphasizes autonomy, competence, and relatedness could help identify intrinsic and extrinsic motivators that drive students toward sustained research involvement. While the study highlights strong student research output, it does not address the barriers faced by those who did not publish. Limited engagement among some students may reflect disparities in mentorship, unequal access to research opportunities, or differences in perceived institutional support. To investigate these potential factors, a follow-up study has been initiated, involving a survey of students across all cohorts.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study highlights the significant impact of an integrated research module on medical students’ research engagement and publication output, reinforcing the role of structured research training in shaping future clinician-scientists. By embedding research as a core curricular component, the module fosters scientific literacy, critical thinking, and evidence-based decision-making, essential competencies for medical professionals in an increasingly complex healthcare landscape. Our findings highlight the importance of early exposure to research, with prior research experience, mentorship, and access to institutional resources emerging as key determinants of student success in scholarly publishing. Framed through Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, research training functions as a democratizing force in academic medicine by enhancing students’ epistemic authority and symbolic capital. Complementary frameworks, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, Bernstein’s Code Theory, and Coleman’s Social Capital Theory, further explain how structured mentorship, academic networks, and institutional scaffolding contribute to research competence and productivity. Additionally, academic resilience is identified as a crucial determinant of sustained engagement in scholarly activity.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo build on these findings, future institutional strategies should focus on expanding institutional access to research databases, integrating AI-driven analytics, strengthening mentorship programs, and establishing financial support mechanisms for student publications. Furthermore, longitudinal studies tracking students’ research engagement beyond graduation would provide valuable insights into the long-term impact of early research training on academic and professional trajectories.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGiven these findings, implementing structured change management strategies will be essential for overcoming institutional barriers and ensuring sustainable research training. Mento’s Change Management Model, which emphasizes the assessment, planning, implementation, and reinforcement of institutional change, provides a relevant framework for addressing these challenges (33). By aligning research curriculum enhancements with Mento’s staged approach, institutions can systematically evaluate existing limitations, engage key stakeholders, introduce targeted interventions, and ensure continuous adaptation through feedback-driven refinement. This strategic approach will be critical in ensuring that the evolving research module remains responsive to student needs, institutional constraints, and global advancements in medical education.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, this study reinforces the transformative role of structured research integration in medical education, demonstrating how a well-designed research module can bridge the gap between knowledge acquisition and scholarly contribution. As medical education evolves to meet the demands of a rapidly advancing healthcare ecosystem, ensuring equitable, sustainable, and high-quality research training remains a fundamental priority in cultivating the next generation of clinician-scientists.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eMBRU - Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai Health, Dubai\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eISSN – International Standard Serial Number\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePMID – PubMed Identifier\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePMCID – PubMed Central Identifier\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIRB – Institutional Review Board\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMD- Doctor of Medicine\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIF- Impact Factor\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCS – CiteScore\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZPD -\u0026nbsp;Vygotsky’s\u0026nbsp;Zone of Proximal Development\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLPP - Lave and Wenger’s\u0026nbsp;Legitimate Peripheral Participation model\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDSREC - Dubai Scientific Research Ethics Committee\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAPC - Article Processing Charges\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.1 Ethics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the relevant MBRU IRB Committee (Reference #MBRU IRB-2023-54) and by the Dubai Scientific Research Ethics Committee (DSREC), Dubai Health Authority (DSREC-06/2024_17). \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConsent to participate: \u0026apos;Not applicable\u0026apos; because our study involved analysis of publicly available data from published articles. No human participants or personal data were involved, as the study focused on quantifying the research output of undergraduate medical students at our university.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study involved analysis of data extracted from already published articles in the public domain. No individual-level or sensitive human data were used, and thus, compliance with the Helsinki Declaration were not required.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.2 Consent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNeed for consent was deemed unnecessary by the MBRU IRB Committee. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.3 Availability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets analysed during the current study are not publicly available, as they are derived from internal institutional records and summaries of published articles. The data has not been publicly shared in order to protect the privacy of our students. However, the authors have no objections to sharing the dataset upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.4 Competing Interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.5 Funding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The authors would like to thank Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, UAE, for payment of the article processing charges. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.6 Authors\u0026rsquo; contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAH, methodology, investigation, data curation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003cbr\u003e SS, writing original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFE, writing original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRH, writing original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSDP, writing original draft, writing-review and editing, funding acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYB, methodology, writing original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTL, writing original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAK, methodology, formal analysis, data curation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAJA, project administration, conceptualization, methodology, data curation, supervision, final approval of the manuscript, writing-original draft, review and editing, data curation; funding acquisition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.7 Acknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe would like to thank Professor Jeyaseelan Lakshmana for his invaluable support in facilitating the didactic sessions for the integrated research curriculum at the College of Medicine, MBRU. We would also like to thank Ahmed Alaa Hegazy and Julia-Laura Schulz for their contributions in the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e8 Clinical Trial Number \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCarnell B. Towards a connected curriculum in architectural education: research-based education in practice. Charrette. 2017;4(1):14-26.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEbert C, Schneider T, Stapenhorst C. Undergraduate Research in Architecture. In: Mieg HA, Ambos E, Brew A, Galli D, Lehmann J, editors. The Cambridge Handbook of Undergraduate Research. Cambridge Handbooks in Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2022. p. 355-62.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSalam A, Hamzah JC, Chin TG, Siraj HH, Idrus R, Mohamad N, et al. Undergraduate Medical Education Research in Malaysia: Time for a Change. Pak J Med Sci. 2015;31(3):499-503.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Aacute;vila MJ, Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-Restrepo A. The importance of research in undergraduate medical education. Medwave. 2014;14(10).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMokhtari B, Badalzadeh R, Ghaffarifar S. The next generation of physician-researchers: undergraduate medical students\u0026apos; and residents\u0026apos; attitudes, challenges, and approaches towards addressing them. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):1313.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBhuiya T, Makaryus AN. The Importance of Engaging in Scientific Research during Medical Training. Int J Angiol. 2023;32(3):153-7.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLarson EB. How can clinicians incorporate research advances into practice? J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S20-4.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eden Bakker CR, Ommering BW, van Leeuwen TN, Dekker FW, De Beaufort AJ. Assessing publication rates from medical students\u0026apos; mandatory research projects in the Netherlands: a follow-up study of 10 cohorts of medical students. BMJ Open. 2022;12(4):e056053.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWaaijer CJF, Ommering BWC, van der Wurff LJ, van Leeuwen TN, Dekker FW. Scientific activity by medical students: the relationship between academic publishing during medical school and publication careers after graduation. Perspect Med Educ. 2019;8(4):223-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee GSJ, Chin YH, Jiang AA, Mg CH, Nistala KRY, Iyer SG, et al. Teaching Medical Research to Medical Students: a Systematic Review. Med Sci Educ. 2021;31(2):945-62.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMass-Hern\u0026aacute;ndez LM, Acevedo-Aguilar LM, Lozada-Mart\u0026iacute;nez ID, Osorio-Agudelo LS, Maya-Betancourth J, Paz-Echeverry OA, et al. Undergraduate research in medicine: A summary of the evidence on problems, solutions and outcomes. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022;74:103280.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eResearch MoHEaS. Evaluation Framework for Universities and Risk Matrix: Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research; 2024 [Available from: https://www.caa.ae/PORTALGUIDELINES/Outcomes-based%20Evaluation%20Framework%20for%20HEIs%20and%20Risk%20Matrix.pdf.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOtaki F, AlHashmi D, Khamis AH, Azar AJ. Investigating the evolution of undergraduate medical students\u0026apos; perception and performance in relation to an innovative curriculum-based research module: A convergent mixed methods study launching the 8A-Model. PLoS One. 2023;18(1):e0280310.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNaidoo N, Azar AJ, Khamis AH, Gholami M, Lindsbro M, Alsheikh-Ali A, et al. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Distance Learning Framework to Adapt to the Changing Landscape of Anatomy Instruction in Medical Education During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Proof-of-Concept Study. Front Public Health. 2021;9:726814.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAzar AJ, Khamis AH, Naidoo N, Lindsbro M, Boukhaled JH, Gonuguntla S, et al. Design, Implementation and Evaluation of a Distance Learning Framework to Expedite Medical Education during COVID-19 pandemic: A Proof-of-Concept Study. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2021;8:23821205211000349.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTouissi Y, Boulaich O, El Idrissi FE, Hjiej G, Stitou O, Belakbyer H, et al. Medical students\u0026apos; contribution to research; the scientific output of medical theses held in Moroccan medical schools during the last decade (2011-2021). Med Educ Online. 2023;28(1):2218677.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBourdieu P, Passeron J-C. Reproduction in education, society and culture, 2nd ed. Nice R, editor. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc; 1990. xxvi, 254-xxvi, p.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeim SM, Howse D, Bracke P, Mendoza K. Promoting evidence based medicine in preclinical medical students via a federated literature search tool. Med Teach. 2008;30(9-10):880-4.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHealey M, Jenkins A. Developing Undergraduate Research and Inquiry. 2009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBates J, Ellaway RH. Mapping the dark matter of context: a conceptual scoping review. Med Educ. 2016;50(8):807-16.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSanders D, Welk DS. Strategies to scaffold student learning: applying Vygotsky\u0026apos;s Zone of Proximal Development. Nurse Educ. 2005;30(5):203-7.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLave J, Wenger E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh P. Pedagogising Knowledge: Bernstein\u0026rsquo;s Theory of the Pedagogic Device. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 2002;23.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRogo\u0026scaron;ić S, Baranović B. Social Capital and Educational Achievements: Coleman vs. Bourdieu. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal. 2016;6:81-100.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHabermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action. Boston: Beacon Press 1984.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGriffin MF, Hindocha S. Publication practices of medical students at British medical schools: experience, attitudes and barriers to publish. Med Teach. 2011;33(1):e1-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEjaz K, Shamim MS, Shamim MS, Hussain SA. Involvement of medical students and fresh medical graduates of Karachi, Pakistan in research. J Pak Med Assoc. 2011;61(2):115-20.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBonilla-Escobar FJ, Bonilla-Velez J, Tob\u0026oacute;n-Garc\u0026iacute;a D, \u0026Aacute;ngel-Isaza AM. Medical student researchers in Colombia and associated factors with publication: a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(1):254.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSolomon SS, Tom SC, Pichert J, Wasserman D, Powers AC. Impact of medical student research in the development of physician-scientists. J Investig Med. 2003;51(3):149-56.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eT\u0026oacute;th B, Berek L, Gul\u0026aacute;csi L, P\u0026eacute;ntek M, Zrubka Z. Automation of systematic reviews of biomedical literature: a scoping review of studies indexed in PubMed. Systematic Reviews. 2024;13(1):174.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNarayanan S, Ramakrishnan R, Durairaj E, Das A. Artificial Intelligence Revolutionizing the Field of Medical Education. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e49604.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWenger E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBanerjee Y, Tuffnell C, Alkhadragy R. Mento\u0026rsquo;s change model in teaching competency-based medical education. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19(1):472.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1: Delivery Timeline of Research Module Courses by Phase, Year, and Cohort\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePhase\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eYear\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSemester\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch course credit hours\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch course complexity\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;level\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCourse Duration (weeks)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Curriculum\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eYears of research course delivery\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCohort 2022\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCohort 2023\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePhase 1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNormal structure function and behaviour\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYear 1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFoundational\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTheoretical foundations of research methodology and biostatistics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2016\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFoundational\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContinuation of foundational concepts using active learning strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePhase 2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAbnormal structure function and behaviour\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYear 2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReinforcement\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntermediate research training: students select projects from a vetted list.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2017\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndependent research project with supervision\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents begin independent research under faculty supervision.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2019\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYear 3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndependent research project with supervision\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCompletion and presentation of research\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2018\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2019\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eApplication of research skills in clinical practice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResearch consolidation and clinical readiness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2019-2022\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Graduation June 2022)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2020-2023\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Graduation June 2023\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePhase 3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eClinical practice\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYears 4-6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSem 7-12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eApplication in clinical setting\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e120\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntegration of research in clinical practice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFollow-up duration (as of December 31, 2023)\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 9px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 7px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 8px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 20px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7.5 years\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e6.5 years\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLegend Table 1: No, number; Sem, semester.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eThe MBRU undergraduate medical program spans six years and it\u0026rsquo;s structured across three phases: Phase 1 (Year 1) and Phase 2 (Years 2-3) deliver pre-clinical basic sciences, while Phase 3 (Years 4-6) focuses on clinical clerkships. The curriculum follows a spiral structure with integrated courses that revisit subjects at increasing complexity. As part of this structure, five sequential integrated research courses are delivered in Phases 1 and 2 during the first five semesters, totaling 9 credit hours. The first cohort commenced in August 2016 and graduated in June 2022, while the second cohort began in August 2017 and graduated in 2023.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eResearch productivity time was measured up to a fixed endpoint of December 31, 2023, corresponding to 7.5 years of follow-up for Cohort 2022 and 6.5 years for Cohort 2023.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2: Summary of the Twenty-Six Variables Included in the Study Database.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"654\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScholarly Metrics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable Description\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor information\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudent name\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003eGraduation year\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eORCID\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthorship details\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAuthorship position of the student\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudent as corresponding author\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal number of authors in the publication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAffiliation of principle investigator with MBRU\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy details\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudy title\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudy type\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResearch study part of the dissertation curriculum\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"6\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eJournal information\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal name\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYear of publication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003eJournal Impact factor\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003eJournal CiteScore\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJournal Quartile rank on SCImago\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercentile ranking of the journal within its field\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublication details\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCitation of the publication\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDigital Object Identifier (DOI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInternational Standard Serial Number (ISSN)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePubMed Identifier (PMID)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePubMed Central Identifier (PMCID)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e6. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCitation metrics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of citations of the publication on Scopus\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of citations of the publication on Google Scholar\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e7. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublisher information\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublisher of the journal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e8. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGrant funding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGrant-funding received (through internal or external grants)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 264px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e9. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInstitutional and funding information\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 390px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInstitutional Review Board (IRB) was applicable and obtained\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3: Publication Output of Medical Students Graduating in 2022 (N=49) and 2023 (N=35), Covering Publications from September 1, 2016 to December 31, 2023\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"633\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eScholarly Metrix\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCohort 2022\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCohort 2023\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eResearch projects students were involved in\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e235\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e321\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublished research projects\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e196\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e259\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePublications removing duplicates\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e131\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e45\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e169\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents as first author\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49 (37.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23 (51.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72 (42.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents as corresponding authors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18 (13.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (20.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27 (15.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublications with Principal Investigator from College of Medicine\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36 (27.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16 (35.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49 (29.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAuthors per publication, median [range]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6 [1-63]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5 [2-28]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5 [1-63]\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePMID\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e105 (80.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35 (77.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e133 (78.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePMCID\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83 (63.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25 (55.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e104 (61.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublications requiring IRB approval\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17 (13.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12 (26.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27 (16.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePublications receiving funding\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19 (14.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (24.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29 (17.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNumber of students per Cohort\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e49\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e35\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e84\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents who did not publish\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (22.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14 (40.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25 (29.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents with \u0026ge; 1 publication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38 (77.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21 (60.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e59 (70.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents with exactly 1 publication\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (28.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (42.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20 (33.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents with exactly 2 publications\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (28.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4 (19.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15 (25.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents with 3-6 publications\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10 (26.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5 (23.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15 (25.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents with \u0026ge;7 publications\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6 (15.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (14.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (15.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents with ORCID\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24 (49)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10 (28.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34 (40.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 291px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStudents who published their curricular dissertation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 126px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10 (20.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 112px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (31.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21 (25.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eFirst graduating cohorts that were enrolled in the\u0026nbsp;Doctor of Medicine (MD), College of Medicine (CoM), Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. At the time of this study there were only two graduating cohorts (2022 and 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eEach student may have multiple publications, resulting in the total number of publications exceeding the number of students in the cohort.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003eSeven duplicate articles were identified across the two graduating cohorts, leaving a total of 169 unique publications in the database.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePMID, PubMed Identifier; PMCID, PubMed Central Identifier; ORCID, Open Researcher and Contributor ID; MD, Doctor of Medicine; CoM, College of Medicine; MBRU, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences; IRB, institutional review board.\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Student Research Publication, Undergraduate Medical Education, Research Curriculum, Clinician-Scientists, Bibliometric Registry, United Arab Emirates, Mentors, Research Engagement, Research Skills, Evidence-based Medicine, Longitudinal Research Training, Educational Outcomes","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6911251/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6911251/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the context of the current rapidly evolving and dynamic medical landscape, the integration of research into undergraduate medical education is crucial for addressing the global deficit of physician-scientists. At Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBRU), Dubai Health, Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), the Doctor of Medicine (MD) curriculum incorporates a compulsory research module designed to equip students with essential research skills through a combination of theoretical instruction, hands-on practice, and mentor-guided learning. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive research module on undergraduate medical students’ research productivity. It examines outcomes across the types of publications (original articles, reviews, and descriptive studies), their characteristics (authorship position, publication timing, and journal category), and their quality (journal indexing, impact factor, and citation metrics). Through this template of a bibliometric registry for compiling research publications, the study seeks to gain essential insights into the value of integrating research into the medical curriculum and its role in cultivating future clinician-scientists.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis retrospective cohort study analyzed the research output of medical students enrolled in the MD program at MBRU. When this study began on June 1, 2023, MBRU, being a newly established medical university had celebrated the graduation of its first two cohorts in June 2022 and June 2023. The first cohort began August 2016, and the second August 2017. The analysis included all student-authored publications up to December 31, 2023. This timeframe corresponds to a follow-up period of 7.5 years for Cohort 2022 and 6.5 years for Cohort 2023. A comprehensive retrieval of students’ publications was identified through the MBRU research registry, PubMed searches, and tracing graduates' ORCID IDs. Twenty-six variables were analyzed, encompassing data on graduation information, study design, authorship, journal indexing, ranking information, and citations. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze quantitative data, while categorical data were summarized using frequencies and percentages. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA total of 84 students with publications from January 01, 2017, to December 31, 2023, were included in the study. A total of 321 research projects were identified, and after removing duplicates, 169 unique publications were found. Among the students, 59 (70.2%) had at least one publication. For these students the median number of publications was 2.0 per student in both cohorts. Additionally, 21 students (25.0%) published their curricular dissertation as part of the research module course. An analysis of publishing identifiers showed that 133 (78.7%) articles had a PMID, while 104 (61.5%) articles had a PMCID. No significant differences were observed between the two cohorts. Furthermore, 34 students (57.6%) had an ORCID ID. Students contributed to a diverse range of study designs. The most common publication types were editorials, letters critiquing published articles in dedicated journals, commentaries, abstracts, or short communications that did not report new observations or data (n = 61, 36.1%). Cohort 2022 contributed significantly more to these publication types than Cohort 2023 (p = 0.0047). Descriptive epidemiological studies were also common, including 21 case reports (12.4%) and 27 cross-sectional studies (16.0%). Cohort 2023 had a significantly higher contribution to this type of publication (p = 0.0093). Case-control, cohort, experimental, systematic reviews and meta-analysis were less common in both cohorts. Regarding authorship positions, 72 (42.6%) of articles had a student as the first author and 54 (32.0%) included two or more students as authors. The total number of College of Medicine (CoM) publications involving students increased from 2017 to 2023, peaking in 2022 with 56 (28.6%) out of the 196 indexed, peer-reviewed articles. Overall, 120 (71.0%) of student-authored publications were published in Q1 or Q2 journals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA comprehensive approach to monitoring student research contributions offers valuable insights into the effectiveness of integrating research into medical education. Early engagement of medical students in research as part of their undergraduate journey enhances their ability of implementing evidence-driven decision-making and supports their development into clinician-scientists who adhere to evidence-based medicine.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Assessing the Impact of a Comprehensive Integrated Research Module on Medical Student Publications and Research Engagement: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Arab Emirates","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-12 12:47:09","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6911251/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2e02af90-cc5f-43d3-8f6b-7f91882e09a5","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 12th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-03-18T09:27:55+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-12 12:47:09","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6911251","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6911251","identity":"rs-6911251","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}