why research is important for medical school

Sign up to our Newsletter

Research for medical school admissions: what do you need to know.

Reviewed by:

Jonathan Preminger

Former Admissions Committee Member, Hofstra-Northwell School of Medicine

Reviewed: 4/25/24

There are several ways in which you can make your application for medical school more attractive to the eyes of admissions committees.

While research experience is not a requirement for most schools, having a research background that is sound, aligns with your major and interests, is fundamentally strong, and overall complements your application’s theme is a perfect way to be a competitive candidate and enhance your possibilities of getting into medical school.

This guide will teach you all that you need to know about research for medical school, ensuring you’ll gain successful and meaningful experiences.

Get The Ultimate Guide on Writing an Unforgettable Personal Statement

Importance of Research for Medical School‍

Your MCAT , GPA, extracurriculars, and clinical experience all play a role in your admissions chances. But research is also key! Most but not all students accepted to medical school have research experience.

According to a survey of incoming medical students conducted by the AAMC , 60% of students participated in some kind of laboratory research for college students. Experts in the field have made their ideas about it very clear; Dr. Petrella, a Stanford University Ph.D. and mentor, states: 

“Our belief is that an exercise science curriculum provides students the opportunity to become responsible professionals of competence and integrity in the area of health and human performance.” 

Today, we’ll talk about how to prepare for and strategically use research to enhance your application and make it more interesting and rich in the eyes of the admissions committee. But first, take a quick look at why you should gain research experience in your undergraduate career. 

What Counts as Research for Medical School?‍

While most research is good research, some things should be taken into consideration before jumping into the next opportunity available: 

• Clinical research is great but research in the humanities or social sciences also counts
• Good research experience develops your writing skills, critical thinking skills, professionalism, integrity, and ability to analyze data
• It’s important to contribute to the research for a long period of time—several months rather than a couple weeks
• You can participate in research part-time or full-time; both count
• You should get involved in research related to your major, desired career, and interests
• Be committed and deeply involved in the research—you’ll be asked about it in interviews!
• Being published as a top contributor of any related research papers looks the best 

Overall, there isn’t really “bad” research experience, so long as you’re committed, make clear contributions, and are genuinely passionate about the subject! 

How to Gain Research Experience as a Pre Med

There are several ways to become involved in research and find research opportunities during your undergraduate years. Research opportunities will be available through the university you’re attending, so make sure to maintain a good relationship and communication with your professors.

One of the best ways to secure a research position is to have a conversation with your professors. They may be looking for a student to help them with an upcoming project, and even if they don’t have any opportunities to offer you, they can easily refer to other staff members who might. 

Try navigating through your university’s website as well; many schools will have a student job board that may host research opportunities. For example, if you were a premed student at the University of Washington , you’d be able to check the Undergraduate Research Program (URP) database in order to filter and find research opportunities.

How Many Hours of Research Do You Need For Medical School? ‍

Since research is not a requirement at most medical schools, there’s no minimum number of hours you should be spending at the lab. Some students report entering medical school with over 2,000 hours of research experience, while others had no more than 400. 

This may seem like a lot but bear in mind that a semester or summer of research involvement sums up to around 500-800 hours. This can be more than enough to show your abilities, commitment, and critical thinking skills.

The hours you should dedicate to research widely depend on your personal circumstances and other aspects of your application. If you have the bandwidth to dedicate more hours to research, you should, but never compromise your grades for it. 

6 Types of Medical Research

There are six main types of research that pre-med students commonly participate in: 

Basic Science Research

Basic science research involves delving into the intricacies of biology in laboratory settings. It's one of the most common pre-med research opportunities and typically entails studying genes, cellular communication, or molecular processes.

Clinical Research

Clinical research is all about working with real patients to learn about health and illness. It's hands-on and great for getting a feel for healthcare. 

Public Health Research

Public health research focuses on analyzing population health trends and developing strategies for disease prevention and health promotion. It's a great area for pre-med students interested in community health, although it is a little harder to get involved in. 

Health Public Policy Research

Health public policy research examines the impact of healthcare regulations and policies on access to care and health outcomes. Although less common among pre-med students, it offers insights into the broader healthcare system, involving analyses of policy effectiveness and healthcare disparities.

Narrative Medicine Research

Narrative medicine research explores the role of storytelling and patient experiences in healthcare delivery. It's a more human side of medicine, focusing on empathy and connection. 

Artificial Intelligence Research

Artificial intelligence research can be difficult for pre-meds to get involved in, but it offers innovative solutions to complex medical problems, such as developing AI algorithms for disease diagnosis and treatment planning.

Tips to Make the Best out of Research Hours 

Now that we've covered the importance of research experience for med school application, we'll go over some tips to help you make the most of your research experience!

Have Noteworthy Research Experience

Having noteworthy research experience is a plus in your application, but it doesn’t end here. The ultimate goal of research is to actually become involved in the most recent projects, discoveries, and questions in your field of study, and prepare you for potential research later in your graduate career.

Use Research as an Opportunity to Gain Skills

Make your best effort to see research experience not only as a way to make your resume and application look better, but also as an opportunity to gain skills and face challenges that will help you become a dedicated professional, and will help you succeed in any your future endeavors. 

Be Clear With Your Goals

Before getting started with your research hours, make sure the research question is perfectly clear to you, and that you’re familiar and interested in what the research is aiming to find or prove. By doing this, you’ll be off to a great start, and your research experience will be valuable from the beginning.

Understand the Project and Be Engaged

Once you’re involved in research, make sure you try your best to perfectly understand every part of it. Shallow and meaningless research experiences won’t get you very far.

During your interview you'll be asked about the research project – regardless of your level of contribution, it’s important for you to be clear, confident, and perfectly articulate to make yourself a competitive candidate.

Take Your Experience Seriously

Also, take your time at the lab very seriously. Try approaching your research contribution as a job; show up in time just like you would show up in time for work, put your best effort in it, and above all, be professional. 

Build Relationships With Your Supervisors

Another tip for maximizing your research experience is to make a connection and form a relationship with the mentor or the professor that will, or is already working with you. By forming strong bonds and relationships, you’ll have the opportunity to ask your mentor for a letter of recommendation.

So, do take every hour spent seriously and work hard to make a good impression. This way, you’ll kill two birds with one stone: you’ll gain research experience while obtaining strong recommendations.

What Kind of Research do Medical Schools Prefer? (Science vs Non-Science)‍

That is a somewhat tricky question. The simple answer is that any research that can show your involvement and commitment and aligns with the theme of your application is beneficial. However, there are a lot of layers to it. 

Probably the most common type of research among applicants –which is also highly valued by medical schools – is science and lab research. If you’re a science major in college, this is probably the way you’d want to go; laboratory-based research. 

With that said, if your major is in the social sciences or humanities, getting involved in research related to your major and your interests is something that medical schools will find attractive.

After all, the majority of schools use a holistic approach to admissions and want their potential candidates to be widely and well-educated individuals.

1. Is Research Experience More Important Than Clinical Experience For Medical School?‍

The short answer to this is no. Even though the majority of applicants have research experience, for many deans of admissions, clinical experience is equally and sometimes even more valuable. The clinical experience involves patient interaction, which is undoubtedly crucial preparation for a life-long career as a physician.

However, getting your first research experience as early as possible in your undergraduate years will help you determine if research is something you’d like to pursue in the future. Plus, it will make it easier for you to secure more research positions in your graduate years, so you should definitely go for it if it's of your interest. 

2. Is Research Experience More Important Than Physician Shadowing?

While both experiences are relevant, research has the added benefit of allowing you to gain hands-on experience. However, don’t forget that doctor shadowing also adds a lot of value to your application, since it serves the purpose of actually seeing what being a physician is, and such experience could determine your interest in moving forward. 

You should also take into account what your medical school of choice expects. For example, for research-focused schools like the Mayo Clinic , research experience will definitely be more important and you should plan on putting most of your energy there. ‍

3. Should I Take A Gap Year Before Medical School To Gain Research Hours?‍

Taking a gap year gives you the opportunity to refine your application and fully focus on what you want to improve. Whether it’s worth it or not depends on your personal and academic circumstances. Remember, it’s not necessarily about how many hours you complete, but the level of contribution you make and your interest in it!

4. Should I Participate In Many, Short-Lived Research Experiences Or In A Few Long Ones?‍

Always choose quality over quantity when it comes to research experience. One long research experience will impress the admissions committee far more than several short ones! More time spent on a project often means greater contributions made, and it demonstrates interest, persistence, and resilience.

5. Should I Look For Research Opportunities Even If My GPA Is A Bit Low?‍

If you’ve gone through a hard time and your GPA is suffering a little bit, definitely focus your energy on that before committing to long hours in the lab. Your GPA and MCAT scores are the non-arguable parts of your application; make sure these are as impeccable as possible, and as soon as there’s an improvement, move on to research.

That doesn’t mean that you should completely forget about the “extras” of your application; as long as you keep a balance between a good GPA, scores, work, and extracurriculars, you’ll be on the right path to creating a competitive application. ‍

6. What Does It Mean To Be Published In Research? Is It Important To Medical Schools?‍

Being published means that your name appears on written documents about research, and it is, indeed, important, but not necessary. We’re not talking about being the first author in a publication, since this is almost impossible for an undergraduate student. 

However, appearing as a co-author on any presentation, publication, or poster will help you build a reputation.

7. What Should I Do If I Don’t Have Research Experience?‍

Ultimately, if you don’t have any research experience and do not have time or do not plan on being part of any research, focus and invest time in your clinical experience as well as volunteering and community service. Also, work on maintaining a good GPA and improving your MCAT score.

Keep in mind, though, that MD-PhD candidates do need to get involved in research before applying, and a big emphasis should be placed on research in these cases. 

8. Does Clinical Research Count Also As Clinical Experience?

Clinical research can count as both clinical experience and research experience in your AMCAS application.

9. Is Research Required For Medical School?

Research experience is not required for most medical schools. However, having research experience will help you stand out and present yourself as a more competitive candidate during the application process.

Final Thoughts‍

Participating in research for medical school can play an important role in the quality of your application. For this reason, knowing how to make your experiences as valuable and rich as possible will play a key role in ensuring the research complements your application and overall profile. 

Research is the perfect way to build a strong skill set that will aid you as a medical student and make you a better physician! 

Schedule A Free Consultation

You may also like.

How to Become a Prosthodontist

Top 10 Accelerated PA Programs

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Med Sci Educ
• v.31(2); 2021 Apr

Teaching Medical Research to Medical Students: a Systematic Review

Gabriel sheng jie lee.

1 Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

Yip Han Chin

Aimei amy jiang, cheng han mg, kameswara rishi yeshayahu nistala, shridhar ganpathi iyer.

2 Division of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore

3 Liver Transplantation, National University Centre for Organ Transplantation, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore

Shuh Shing Lee

4 Centre for Medical Education, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

Choon Seng Chong

5 Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, National University Hospital, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Singapore, 119228 Singapore

Dujeepa D. Samarasekera

Associated data.

Research literacy remains important for equipping clinicians with the analytical skills to tackle an ever-evolving medical landscape and maintain an evidence-based approach when treating patients. While the role of research in medical education has been justified and established, the nuances involving modes of instruction and relevant outcomes for students have yet to be analyzed. Institutions acknowledge an increasing need to dedicate time and resources towards educating medical undergraduates on research but have individually implemented different pedagogies over differing lengths of time.

While individual studies have evaluated the efficacy of these curricula, the evaluations of educational methods and curriculum design have not been reviewed systematically. This study thereby aims to perform a systematic review of studies incorporating research into the undergraduate medical curriculum, to provide insights on various pedagogies utilized to educate medical students on research.

Studies predominantly described two major components of research curricula—(1) imparting basic research skills and the (2) longitudinal application of research skills. Studies were assessed according to the 4-level Kirkpatrick model for evaluation. Programs that spanned minimally an academic year had the greatest proportion of level 3 outcomes (50%). One study observed a level 4 outcome by assessing the post-intervention effects on participants. Studies primarily highlighted a shortage of time (53%), resulting in inadequate coverage of content.

This study highlighted the value in long-term programs that support students in acquiring research skills, by providing appropriate mentors, resources, and guidance to facilitate their learning. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition underscored the importance of tailoring educational interventions to allow students with varying experience to develop their skills. There is still room for further investigation of multiple factors such as duration of intervention, student voluntariness, and participants’ prior research experience. Nevertheless, it stands that mentoring is a crucial aspect of curricula that has allowed studies to achieve level 3 Kirkpatrick outcomes and engender enduring changes in students.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-020-01183-w.

Introduction

Medical research is of high value to clinicians and society. In modern-day practice, the continued growth of knowledge has added richness to the medical world and challenges medical professionals to stay afloat. As such, to navigate the ever-evolving advances in medical practice and technology, literacy in research remains crucial for the effective application of evidence-based medicine. In particular, medical research equips clinicians with skills to critically analyze the clinical relevance of papers to provide invaluable insights into novel treatments.

The integration of research into medical education has been documented to have translated into skills valuable to future clinical practice. Exposure to research experiences may improve analytical reasoning, communication skills, and application of emerging knowledge to patient care [ 1 ]. This may serve to benefit students as future medical practitioners. Early exposure to research experience as medical students may also enhance the relevance of research in routine practice as doctors and has shown to be associated with future postgraduate research involvement [ 2 ]. Lastly, integration of research into medical curricula may provide students with a suitable foundation on which they can further develop their skills as required in their careers [ 3 ].

Yet, despite the growing appreciation of research, the participation of medical students in research remains limited. Most students entering medical school are neither aware of how scientific research functions nor cognizant of its importance [ 4 ]. Research by Stone et al. showed that the motivations fueling students’ research interests include competing for residency and enhancing resumes, amongst others related to career advancement [ 5 ]. With the goal of research being the improvement of evidence-based practice and bench to bedside translational research, such motivations may seem almost perverse [ 5 ]. Furthermore, there are barriers within medical education systems that further hinder students’ exposure and participation in research. Medical students are deterred by the practical difficulties such as the lack of learning opportunities [ 6 ], and challenges in securing research-associated opportunities, particularly if they lack relevant skills [ 1 ]. Burgoyne et al. also found that over half of all medical students are interested in a career incorporating medical research [ 3 ]. Nevertheless, they remain largely unaware of such activities in their host institution due to gaps in the curricula [ 3 ], with even residents finding difficulties in completing research projects [ 7 ]. With the myriad of benefits that medical research can bring, it is therefore important to embrace research as an integral part of the undergraduate medical curriculum, and effectively integrate it into the curriculum.

Currently, studies discussing the effectiveness of imparting research skills to medical students in professional degree programs are available. However, a synthesis of these results has yet to be undertaken. The role of human medical research in medical education has been justified and established, but the nuances involving modes of instruction and relevant outcomes for undergraduate medical students have yet to be analyzed. This study thereby aims to perform a systematic review of studies incorporating research into the undergraduate medical curriculum, to provide insights on various pedagogies utilized to educate medical students on research.

Materials and Methods

Database sources.

In consultation with a medical librarian, three major electronic databases, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science, were searched for articles related to educating students about research from inception until January 2020. With advice from a medical librarian, key search terms such as “medical students” and “research methodology” were applied in the search. The search strategy used can be found in the supplementary materials.

Article Selection and Eligibility Criteria

English articles that evaluated an intervention or existing programs educating medical students about research were included in this review. Medical students were defined in this study as students in a professional medical degree program (postgraduate or undergraduate studies), limited to the human medical field (veterinary field, dentistry, or nursing were excluded). Only primary research articles with the above criteria were considered—all opinions, reviews, commentary, or editorial papers were excluded. A two-stage process of selection was employed, where two authors independently screened through titles and abstracts to select articles according to the eligibility criteria. Thereafter, a full-text sieve was conducted, and articles were excluded based on the eligibility criteria.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two independent authors extracted the following data from the included articles: publication details, study sample demographics (year of study, sample size, research experience), and intervention details (curriculum design, frequency of sessions, mode of teaching). The data coded was then grouped into subcategories described by the included studies and captured the unique observations and perspectives of the pooled data.

While several methods are available for the synthesis of such knowledge [ 8 ], this study focused on emphasizing the relationship between time and resources invested in holistically increasing medical students’ research capabilities, and thus used directed content analysis and deductive theming [ 9 , 10 ]. For outcome measures, the Kirkpatrick model was used [ 11 ]. The Kirkpatrick model consists of four levels: reactions, learning, behaviors, and results of training participants. Specific to research education, level 1 measures participants’ self-reported changes in attitude and interest in research, while level 2 measures objective knowledge retention. Level 3 records changes in participant’s behaviors through increased research productivity and level 4 observes quantifiable outcomes and results beyond the education program such as an enduring active engagement in research [ 11 ]. Thereafter, the data was synthesized and grouped into major categories, according to pedagogy, assessment methods, and outcomes achieved. Any discrepancies were discussed and resolved in consensus or in consultation with a third author.

Quality Appraisal of Included Studies

Quality appraisal was conducted with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) designed to evaluate systematic reviews of education research. MERSQI is a 10-item instrument that grades studies on 6 domains: study design, sampling, type of data, validity of evidence, data analysis, and type of outcomes [ 12 ]. Two authors independently appraised the articles and resolved discrepancies via consensus or in consultation with a third author.

Through database searches, 3573 articles were identified. Thereafter, 157 full-text articles were assessed, and a total 35 articles were included in this paper (Fig. 1 ). Sample size ranged from 11 to 916 (mean = 148) and a total of 5182 students participated in the included studies. Twenty-one studies (60%) were conducted in North America while the remaining studies were conducted in Africa, Asia, Australia, and Europe. One study recruited participants from multiple European countries [ 13 ]. Participants were most often students in their pre-clinical years ( n  = 16, 46%), with six studies reporting prior research experience, and three studies reporting no prior research experience [ 14 – 16 ]. The remaining 26 studies did not report students’ prior research experience. Additionally, 19 studies involved voluntary elective educational interventions, while the other 16 studies observed enforced curricular interventions. Twenty-two articles were quantitative studies, 2 were qualitative, and 11 were mixed method studies. Table ​ Table1 1 summarizes the data of the included articles. Quality assessment was done, and most articles scored 10 and above according to MERSQI, details of the scoring can be seen in Table ​ Table1 1 .

PRISMA flowchart

Summary of included articles

The studies predominantly described two major components of research curricula—(1) imparting basic research skills to students and (2) longitudinal application of research skills. These components were used exclusively by 17 studies and combined into a multimodal approach by 18 studies. Most curricula incorporated a mentorship program ( n  = 28, 80%) to expose students to medical research. Didactic teachings were the next most common method ( n  = 22, 62%). Other methods include small group discussions, e-learning methods, and seminars. Interventions generally occurred over the academic year ( n  = 12, 34%), over the summer break ( n  = 12, 34%), over multiple years ( n  = 6, 17%), or as workshops lasting one to seven days ( n  = 5, 14%). A detailed breakdown of the education curriculum is provided in Table ​ Table2 2 .

Important characteristics of articles evaluating research education to medical students

a Individual studies employed multiple modalities of interventions, leading to percentages adding to greater than 100

b Study employed a mentored research program but did not specify occupation of mentor (peer, faculty member, or otherwise)

c Symposium style

d Self-conducted research

e The extent to which students reacted positively to the curricula, such as enjoyable content, comfortable learning experience, and effective teaching style

f The extent to which students have developed the expertise, knowledge, and skills needed to conduct research. These skills and knowledge were evaluated through increased tests used to measure the students content knowledge

g The extent to which students behavior has changed after completing the education curricula provided by the various schools/organizations. This is evaluated through increased research output through the curricula program

h The extent of success of the curricula in quantifiable factors such as increased rate of research articles published by the school due to students own initiative and not during the term of the curricula

Educational modalities were focused on two main goals. Firstly, studies described curricula designed to teach basic research skills such as formulating research questions and developing study designs [ 17 – 19 ]. The duration of curricula was generally one to seven days [ 20 ], after which participants could also express their interest in research projects [ 15 ]. Secondly, studies aimed to provide students an opportunity to apply their acquired research skills through the completion of a research project, primarily under the supervision of a mentor [ 13 , 15 , 17 – 19 , 21 – 42 ]. Broadly, studies utilized both methods in tandem, while some studies exclusively employed either method.

Basic Research Skills Curricula

Curricula utilized didactic teaching strategies to impart basic skills to students as an introductory course to research. These courses encompassed topics such as experimental design, research methodology, interpretation of experimental data [ 43 ], and statistical analysis [ 16 , 18 , 19 , 25 , 35 ]. Apart from formal didactic sessions, studies also included seminars ( n  = 4, 11%) [ 25 , 30 , 32 , 40 ], e-learning modules ( n  = 4, 11%) [ 37 , 40 , 44 , 45 ], and small group discussion sessions ( n  = 3, 9%) to equip students with research skills [ 23 , 32 , 36 ].

Longitudinal Application of Research Skills

Curricula also incorporated longitudinal mentored research experiences to expose students to research (Table ​ (Table2). 2 ). Students were assigned to mentors from a range of faculties and clinical settings, and were guided through basic biomedical, epidemiological, and community-health-related research projects [ 13 , 19 , 22 , 23 , 33 , 34 , 38 , 41 , 42 , 46 ]. These studies recruited faculty or community research mentors [ 13 , 19 , 22 , 23 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 34 , 38 , 39 , 42 ], with one study recruiting additional peer mentors ( n  = 1, 10%) with prior research experience to guide students [ 22 ].

A Multimodal Approach

Studies in this review predominantly adopted a multimodal approach ( n  = 18, 51.4%), involving both elements of didactic teaching as well as mentorship. Studies included initial classroom instruction on the theoretical aspects of research, followed by a period of practical application under the guidance of mentors [ 13 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 21 , 24 – 29 , 32 , 35 – 37 ]. Apart from incorporating the components mentioned above, such programs conventionally lasted the duration of a summer break [ 17 – 19 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 29 , 34 , 41 – 43 ], an academic year [ 14 , 21 , 24 , 27 , 28 , 31 , 32 , 36 – 38 , 40 , 45 ], or extended to multiple academic years [ 13 , 16 , 21 , 30 , 33 , 39 ].

Assessment Methods

To analyze the impact of didactic curricula and longitudinal research experiences on participants, a majority of the studies utilized pre- and post-surveys ( n  = 27, 77%) to gather both qualitative and quantitative participant feedback [ 14 – 18 , 20 , 22 – 24 , 26 – 32 , 35 – 37 , 39 – 41 , 43 – 45 , 47 , 48 ]. Students’ feedback was collated via qualitative questionnaires [ 39 ], feedback sessions [ 30 ], and Likert scale-type questions to measure their satisfaction with the curricula and interest levels in research [ 47 ].

Studies primarily used knowledge tests to determine the benefits of didactic curricula of students. Evaluation conducted by studies included pre- and post-quizzes (Table ​ (Table2), 2 ), in the form of multiple-choice questions to measure students’ retention of knowledge [ 28 , 47 ]. Quizzes comprised internally developed components and externally sourced questions adapted for institutions’ local contexts [ 44 ]. Studies also established student’s understanding of learning objectives through self-reported scores on closed-ended questionnaires [ 20 ].

Studies also evaluated the research output of students who undertook mentored research projects to assess the effectiveness of the curricula. The number of publications ( n  = 4, 40%) was used as a quantitative marker for effectiveness (Table ​ (Table2). 2 ). Additionally, studies also noted the number of student submissions for conference presentations. Participants were also assessed on their application of research skills via written and oral presentations of their research proposals to the faculty [ 24 ].

Studies that delivered research education through both modalities attempted to evaluate students on both theoretical and practical fronts. Studies developed questionnaires on research methodology and other practices surrounding information literacy to quantitatively assess students’ gain in knowledge [ 28 ]. Studies also monitored the number of students engaged in research beyond the program as well as the frequency of successful presentations and publications [ 25 ].

Level 1 outcomes centered around participants’ self-reported changes in behavior, knowledge, interest in research, and feedback towards the course. Students’ responses to the curricula were overwhelmingly positive [ 36 ]. Students found that research curricula were relevant, interesting, and improved their knowledge and research skills [ 48 ]. Next, studies evaluated level 2 outcomes by assessing the degree to which participants have gained knowledge and skills from curricula [ 16 , 28 , 37 , 44 , 47 , 48 ]. Studies reported significant increases in pre- and post-test results which encompassed both research skills and medical knowledge [ 16 , 42 ].

Curricula exclusively comprised of didactic teaching methods were often not able to produce level 3 outcomes. Two studies were able to observe completed research projects [ 48 ], out of which only one study gave rise to a 0.47% rate of publications produced per student [ 16 ].

Studies describing longitudinal research curricula also recorded level 1 outcomes, primarily in the form of students’ feedback. Participant feedback was uniformly enthusiastic [ 18 ], and participants reported significant increases in knowledge from their baseline to post-intervention [ 29 ]. Studies observed that students better understood the integral place of research in a physician’s role and were more motivated towards careers in specialties they were exposed to [ 13 , 23 ]. In terms of level 2 outcomes, studies revealed that the research curriculum facilitated the acquisition of research-related knowledge amongst students [ 28 , 48 ]. Students showed significant improvements between pre- and post-intervention knowledge quizzes and also reported significantly higher median scores for research items on tests [ 37 ].

Students were able to achieve level 3 outcomes when curricula required students to undertake a research project. Both interventions employing peer mentors ( n  = 2/2, 100%) and researcher mentors ( n  = 16//26, 62%) were shown to produce level 3 outcomes [ 15 , 17 , 21 , 22 , 25 , 27 – 29 , 32 – 37 , 40 , 42 ]. The duration of the educational interventions also had a substantial effect on the ability to achieve level 3 outcomes. Programs that spanned at least a single academic year had the greatest proportion of level 3 outcomes ( n  = 9, 50%) [ 16 , 21 , 27 , 28 , 32 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 40 ], where students reported research skill development and motivation to conduct research in the future [ 38 ]. They were also more likely to publish their completed research papers or present their abstracts at conferences ( n  = 7/12, 58%) [ 21 , 27 , 28 , 32 , 36 , 37 , 40 ].

Multimodal Approach

Studies undertaking a multimodal approach observed outcomes relevant to both didactic teaching and research mentorship. Integrating supervised research projects into curriculum significantly improved medical students’ self-perceived research experiences (level 1) [ 37 , 39 ], and was similarly associated with a large proportion of research publications and presentations ( n  = 12/18, 66%) (level 3). Four studies that incorporated both didactic teaching and a mentored research experience resulted in publication rates of over 50% [ 13 , 32 , 34 , 35 ]. In addition, one study highlighted a level 4 outcome by assessing the post-intervention effects on participants. The study revealed that the longitudinal application of research skills paved the way for future participation in research and attainment of research accolades [ 25 ].

Curricular Incorporation

Nineteen studies (54.3%) offered research programs to students on an elective basis, of which 10 produced level 3 outcomes, where students were successful in presenting their research and listed as co-authors [ 15 , 17 , 22 , 25 , 26 , 29 , 33 , 34 , 40 , 42 ]. Such elective programs were provided on a sign-up basis and took the form of summer programs or additional courses conducted outside of curriculum time. Notably, students have been noted to be engaged in research even after the course of the program [ 25 ].

Sixteen studies (45.7%) conducted research education as a compulsory portion of the medical undergraduate program. Studies devote a portion of the undergraduate curriculum to research education in the form of longitudinal or short-term modules. Similarly, more than half of these studies showcased students publishing articles during medical school. Unique to this group of studies was the reporting of level 2 outcomes, where students exhibited a gain in research knowledge [ 16 , 21 , 28 , 47 , 48 ]. Studies conducting mandatory courses have also been observed to offer research electives to students involving topics of interest. These students likewise proceeded to publish papers under international peer review [ 36 ].

Only 43% ( n  = 15) of all the studies discussed challenges in implementing their respective interventions [ 14 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 26 – 30 , 32 – 34 , 42 , 45 , 48 ]. The most frequently highlighted challenge amongst studies providing basic research theory was a shortage of time ( n  = 2/7, 29%) [ 20 , 48 ], which resulted in insufficient coverage of content.

Participant feedback highlighted a lack of time to complete research projects [ 48 ]. One study noted that multi-year curricula achieved learning objectives by providing sufficient time to facilitate participants’ longitudinal coverage of the community-oriented primary care cycle [ 16 ]. Other challenges surfaced include maintaining the commitment of mentors and finding an appropriate timeslot for the education program to avoid conflicts with other modules of the undergraduate medical program [ 16 , 19 , 20 , 34 ].

Naturally, the multimodal approach shares similar challenges to both pedagogies above. Studies noted a shortage of time to fulfil classroom learning outcomes, as well as to provide a significant window of time for students to undertake research projects under the wing of a mentor [ 26 – 28 , 30 ]. This was exhibited by student requests for more preparation in using statistical analysis software [ 26 ], and community partners’ low ranking of the program timeframe [ 27 ].

This systematic review summarizes the variety of methods that the institutions have utilized to impart research skills to medical students. The analysis highlights two main approaches of teaching these skills: through classroom-based teaching of basic theoretical research skills, and providing students a mentored research experience. Students first developed these skills through didactic teaching methods such as through workshops or seminars, which were then reinforced through the application of these skills under the supervision of a mentor. Our review found that curricula, which utilized both didactic and mentored research components, reliably achieved level 3 outcomes. Programs giving priority to mentoring students in the research process greatly reaped the benefits of mentors. The literature shows that such mentoring resulted in a greater proportion of published papers, compared to exclusively didactic teaching methods. Beyond supervising students, mentors also played an essential role in career counselling and motivating students, and prove to be of significant value in an academic setting [ 2 , 39 , 49 ].

Students’ levels of motivation to learn also bear weight on the outcomes of educational interventions and is of great interest to most educators [ 50 ]. This review found that there were no major differences in the research output of either elective or mandatory research programs. Mandatory research programs were often accompanied by standardized assessments, possibly arising from the institutions’ desires to evaluate the quality of their research education and students’ gain in knowledge [ 28 , 48 ]. It is thus unwise to attribute a recorded gain in knowledge solely to the motivation of students. However, it remains that motivation has a positive impact on the learning of students. Notably, Cluver et al. recorded a continued engagement in research following a research elective program, thereby underscoring the importance of an individual’s interest and motivation towards research [ 25 ].

This study also identified challenges to effectively develop and implement such curricula. Firstly, meaningfully incorporating a comprehensive and systematic research component into the content-heavy medical curricula, especially during the clinical phase of student learning, was difficult. This led institutions to limit the student exposure in research as well as the scope of content covered. Some institutions were able to circumvent this challenge by either integrating research as a longitudinal component of the undergraduate curriculum or dedicating time for students to work on research [ 16 , 21 ]. Studies that spanned at least one academic year achieved a higher number of students with level 3 outcomes. Secondly, mentored programs faced the additional challenge of sourcing for mentors, maintaining their commitment, and equipping them with sufficient knowledge and skills to both educate and provide a holistic learning experience in research. This second challenge was overcome with the inclusion of peer teaching, which eased the need to contend for trained medical professionals [ 22 , 40 ]. It is essential that institutions recognize and strive to overcome these challenges in designing an effective curriculum to equip medical students with research skills.

As part of continuous quality improvement and program reforms, most institutions have developed program evaluation processes. However, these processes heavily relied on participants’ self-reporting Kirkpatrick level 1 outcomes. Few studies focused on higher levels which required independent evaluators or standardized tests to obtain quantitative data. The focus was primarily on capturing short-term outcomes, which failed to highlight the long-term behavioral changes and did not necessarily equate to future application of learnt skills by students [ 11 ]. Program evaluations should strive towards attaining the fourth and final level of the Kirkpatrick model, where students are able to replicate, impart, and apply these competencies in future settings [ 11 ]. Endeavoring to achieve level 4 outcomes would push educational institutions to implement curricula that have an enduring impact on students beyond medical school, allowing them to develop both a capacity and an interest to continue research activities. However, studies face difficulty evaluating such outcomes because it necessitates tedious tracking of graduates’ research performance in their future careers.

An interesting observation was that most studies did not achieve level 2 outcomes as compared to levels 1 and 3. This can be attributed to two possible causes. Firstly, the model does not strictly limit a linear progression from levels 1 to 4. In the case of undergraduate medical research education, there is a prevalent usage of self-assessment tools which resulted in larger proportion of level 1 outcomes. Furthermore, undergoing a mentored research experience often results in a tangible, independently reviewed research product, which qualifies as a level 3 outcome. The second possible reason could be due to the additional required effort of preparing a quiz and conducting a pre- and post-tests, resulting in a lower number of published literatures on level 2 outcomes. This is as opposed to level 3 outcomes which are easily objectively measured by the number of journal publications or conference presentations, and level 1 outcomes through feedback surveys. Nevertheless, there are increasing doubts regarding the individual’s capacity to conduct self-assessments, which gives rise to self-inflated scores and inadequate learning of non-motivated students [ 51 ]. This calls for designing evaluations with more objective data points and long-term structured mentoring, which could bridge these gaps.

In order to achieve long-term and higher levels of outcomes, institutions need to design and cater curricula to students at different stages of research skill acquisition as they face different issues and disparate educational experiences depending on the level of competency they possess [ 52 ]. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition presents five developmental stages— novice , advanced beginner , competent , proficient , and expert —that describes a shift from tedious analysis in line with abstract and rigid principles to a concrete foundation of experience that enables expeditious intuitive decision-making [ 53 ]. Adopting this model for research education introduces the need to teach these skills in a systematic and longitudinal fashion that is meaningfully integrated to the core medical curriculum. The curriculum can be structured in a way to teach the basic fundamentals of research to newer participants ( novices and advanced beginners ) and then move on to practical skills and real-life practice of paper-writing and statistical analysis for experienced students ( advanced beginners , competent , and proficient students) in later years of learning as well as to inculcate values and behaviors in students who have attained more proficient research abilities ( proficient and expert students) (Fig. ​ (Fig.2 2 ).

Dreyfus model of skill acquisition

The allocation of curriculum time to developing the research skills of students hinges upon the focus and goals of the individual institution. The formation of an intercalated program to nurture clinician-scientists will therefore preferentially expose students to a wide range of research opportunities and research seminars [ 54 ]. However, medical research is but one of the components of the undergraduate medical curriculum. The limitations and challenges discussed earlier hinder undergraduate medical students from potentially advancing to the higher tiers of the Dreyfus model [ 16 , 28 , 30 , 40 ]. It is thus impractical to expect institutions and students to achieve competency within the span of the course. Instead, institutions should opt to develop a curriculum streamlined according to students’ skill levels that will maximize the limited time students have under the institution’s care and jurisdiction and facilitate a more appropriate assignment of students to mentors who possess different resources and research projects at hand.

Most students enter the research fraternity with no prior research experience and start as novices, unfamiliar with research protocol and relevant analytical tools [ 55 ]. Such students require straightforward, rigid rules and guidelines to familiarize themselves with the various steps in conducting research. Offering novice students an opportunity to learn research in a safe environment is essential in lowering the barriers to entry and to demystify the processes for acquiring research skills and critical analytical skills [ 56 , 57 ]. As such, novices benefit greatly from didactic teaching modalities that elucidate theories and methodologies underlying research, focusing on the foundation knowledge needed for research [ 58 ]. After attaining a theoretical understanding of research, novices can progress to an advanced beginner through continuous testing of concepts and developing some functional skills. Advanced beginners better appreciate each step of the research process but require active recollection and effort to complete each task, and face difficulty with practical applications. For these students, curricula should provide students opportunities to join simple research projects under mentors, to allow them to accumulate experience, develop practical skills, and allow them to consolidate their knowledge to progress to the next stage, competency [ 59 ]. Institutions should expose students at this stage to a broader range of research projects in different fields, allowing them to accumulate experience from various medical fields. Competent individuals are able to complete most tasks involved in writing a paper but remain reliant on guidelines, especially in unfamiliar contexts, and thus require the scrutiny and supervision of mentors [ 60 ]. The accumulation of experience from various fields will allow them to develop pattern-recognition, thereby reducing their dependence on rigid rules, augmenting their quality of research. Most undergraduate medical students fall in the above categories, with the achieving of higher tiers of expertise restricted to an exceptional few, or to the domain of postgraduate courses and professional researchers.

The proficient individual undertakes sustained active participation in research to accumulate experience. Students proficient in research have sharpened research skills, a significant understanding of the relevant analytical methods and resources in place. Moreover, they have an awareness of their interests, strengths, and weaknesses—critical for self-regulation—and are thereby able to consistently produce better quality research compared to their peers [ 59 ]. Institutions best serve by connecting students to organizations or experts with additional resources and research opportunities, which students may not be able to procure as individuals. It is also at this stage where students are sufficiently skilled to become peer mentors themselves. This process of peer mentoring further polishes research skills and makes individuals cognizant of knowledge gaps. In addition, students undergoing mentorship programs were more likely to take responsibility of both their own and their peers’ learning, ultimately facilitating tangible results [ 61 , 62 ]. Without mentoring, students in included studies often hit a glass ceiling at level 1 outcomes. This suggests that neither interest nor knowledge alone can propel a student towards desired behavioral changes. Rather, mentoring is the key to inducing a greater form of change amongst research students by allowing to them be engaged and inspire confidence in them [ 13 ]. This will also overcome the challenge highlighted earlier of recruiting faculty mentors and maintaining their commitment. Peer mentors have the relevant advantages of a lower cost, add to a larger pool of potential mentors, lend credibility and effectiveness in role modelling, and help develop a common perspective [ 63 ]. It is therefore of great value to institutions to involve proficient students as peer mentors in longitudinal mentorship programs, with additional guidance from faculty mentors or supervisors to develop intuitive research practices [ 60 ].

With cumulative experience as both mentee and mentor, proficient individuals eventually progress to become experts . Experts are distinguished by behavioral and attitude changes. This is key in a student’s journey towards becoming a clinician-scientist as this is marked by an endeavor to conduct research and contribute to existing literature. Experts possess experience in conducting research and writing research papers and are able to function more intuitively when tackling challenges and solving problems compared to their peers [ 58 ]. Curricula should focus on involving such students as mentors which will facilitate their own continuous education and prevent regression of skills [ 60 ]. This course of ramping up curricula in alignment with the Dreyfus model has been detailed in other studies and similarly underscore the progression from basic knowledge to functional skills and personal growth [ 60 , 64 ]. This ultimately equips students of different stages to meet challenges along their research journey in the limited time undergraduates have under an institution [ 58 ].

Theoretically, the Dreyfus model describes a progressive acquisition of research skills for a novice to become an expert. A student who achieves the level of an expert would undoubtedly possess a remarkable level of intuition and refined skillsets. However, most curricula from the included studies only facilitated students’ growth up to a certain point along the Dreyfus model. While the Dreyfus model serves as a guide to suggest how institutions may best nurture students from a broad spectrum of abilities, the role of undergraduate medical research education is not to simply achieve mastery. Rather, it is to develop the abilities of individuals. Presented with the challenges and limitations discussed earlier, institutions should endeavor to serve as a stepping stone in a student’s journey as a medical practitioner or researcher and to develop an enduring interest and improved capacity for research.

Recommendations

We present the following recommendations for consideration for institutions aiming to design curricula including research exposure.

• Adopt a longitudinal approach—Research modules spanning a longer period allow sufficient time to build a strong research foundation, multiple research opportunities, and greater rates of completion
• Mandate and incorporate research education into the core curriculum—Recognizing research as a core component of education and dedicating time minimizes future scheduling and resource conflicts with other modules of the program.
• Engage and consider student mentors—Mentors are indispensable in research training and should be engaged to ensure sustained, long-term commitment. Utilizing student mentors would further increase both the mentors’ and mentees’ commitment to learn, improve, and polish their acquired skills.

Limitations

This systematic review acknowledges a few limitations. Firstly, our review only considered studies observing undergraduate medical education incorporating research skills and did not consider postgraduate research degree studies such as Masters, MD, or PhD programs, which has greater rigor and a higher level of understanding for research. Next, we were also limited by the inherent quality and scope of the included studies, which lacked data on evaluative models. Currently, the available studies assess effectiveness of medical research educational programs using a myriad of internally designed questionnaires and tests and lack a consistent objective framework to evaluate the effectiveness of their intervention. Furthermore, many studies failed to determine the extent of participants’ prior experience in research and made minimal adjustments to curricula accordingly. As such, it was challenging to observe any enduring impact of the curricula on students.

Research literacy remains important for equipping clinicians with the analytical skills to tackle an ever-evolving medical landscape and maintain an evidence-based approach when treating patients. This systematic review has reiterated the value of incorporating a longitudinal mentorship program in the medical undergraduate curricula and has highlighted the importance of tailoring educational interventions, to allow students with varying experience to develop their skills and initiate the learning process for students without prior experience. There is still room for further investigation of multiple factors such as duration of intervention, student voluntariness, and participants’ prior research experience. Nevertheless, it stands that mentoring is a crucial aspect of curricula that has allowed studies to achieve level 3 Kirkpatrick outcomes and engender enduring changes in students.

(PDF 9 kb)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Ms. Annelissa Chin from Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, medical library for assisting us with the search strategy.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Premed Research

How Important is Research for Medical School

How important is research for medical school? Research is a critical part of your medical learning, and its important for both how to prepare for med school applications and of course your entire medical career. Research experience of any type is a valuable asset on medical school applications, and clinical research experience even more so. If you’ve completed a stint in a clinical research position, these can count towards how many clinical hours you need for medical school . Some of the most competitive or research-focused medical colleges even require students to have prior research experience to be accepted. Not every med school asks for research experience, but every medical student will need some research experience under their belts by the time they graduate. In this blog, we’ll look at how important research is for medical school, what research experience can do for you and where to look to find medical research opportunities. 

>> Want us to help you get accepted? Schedule a free initial consultation here <<

Article Contents 6 min read

How important is research for medical school.

There are two sides to this question. The first is whether research experience is important for medical school applications. The second is whether gaining research experience is an important part of attending medical school. The answer to both of these is undoubtedly yes, research is very important for medical school.

Of course, there are some qualifications to this importance. Having research experience is not a hard requirement for the vast majority of medical school applications and students can still be accepted without pre-med research experience. For highly competitive medical schools, such as Stanford Medical School , or medical schools with a heavy focus on research, it may not only be a requirement but a huge asset and a way for you to ensure your medical school application stands out . For a majority of competitive, research-heavy medical colleges, up to 90% of matriculating students have prior research experience.

Check out our video for more advice on how to find premed research experience

It’s a good idea to check Medical School Admission Requirements ( MSAR ) to see if your choice of med school requires applicants to have any research experience, and if the admissions board has any preference for what type of research experience. A majority of schools will gladly accept students with research experience, but your priority should be on crafting an excellent med school app first and foremost. If you have a strong application and you have the time, you can consider looking for pre-med research opportunities to add to your application as a bonus.

But even if your choice of med school doesn’t require research experience, it is still extremely important to your journey as a med student and your future career as a doctor. If you are planning to apply to a very competitive medical school program, intend to pursue an MD/PhD program or are applying to a research-intensive medical college, research experience is an absolute must. And if none of these apply to you, eventually you will want to add research experience to your medical school resume, too.

First, let’s look at what research experience can do or your medical school applications.

Research experience for medical school applications

Research experience might be a necessary requirement for many med school applications, depending on the school and the program, but the type of research experience can vary significantly. For most med schools, they aren’t choosy about the type of research you have experience in, even if it’s not directly related to the medical field. Having any kind of research position in a scientific discipline will lend you invaluable experience and skills that will transfer to your time at med school.

But something that can help you stand out, and which medical schools value more heavily is clinical research experience. To gain clinical research as a premed might not always be possible for all students. Many try to find virtual research for premed students or look into virtual shadowing opportunities. But straight research experience and even shadowing experience is not considered actual clinical experience, and if you have any direct clinical experience on your med school application, it is considered an asset no matter where you apply.

Even if your choice of med school isn’t bothered by a lack of premed research experience or you don’t plan to pursue a career in medical research, this doesn’t mean you’re off the hook. Research is still an important aspect of medical school and being a practicing physician. Research experience provides you with pivotal skills you’ll employ as a doctor, but it can also broaden and deepen your medical knowledge and medical skills. Doctors rely on research to inform them and broaden their understanding of the medical field. And plenty of clinical physicians take the time to do their own research or publish research as a way to further their careers and open up new opportunities. Research experience also serves as a way to make your medical school resume stand out when you’re applying for jobs in residency and beyond. It might even be a requirement if you want to apply for research training positions or specialty medical research jobs.

For medical students in particular, they will be expected to undertake research projects and will be provided dedicated, protected research time to not only conduct their own individual or team research but to read the work of other researchers, too. Not all of your research experiences need to come directly through school, either. You can and are encouraged to pursue research opportunities outside med school as well. Any experiences you can add to your portfolio will be to your benefit. In short, research is a foundational part of the med school experience and in developing your skills as a medical professional.

So how can research experience help you in medical school? What advantages and benefits can it bring you? We’ll take a closer look at how important research is for medical school students and how it can be a long-term advantage in their careers.

In the vein of critically evaluating research work, conducting research will naturally develop your critical thinking and analysis skills. Throughout med school you will be asked to participate in, read about and conduct research, as doing so is part of the foundation of your medical knowledge. Research experience can also be influential in developing other important medical skills, too, such as better communication, teamwork and writing skills. It\u2019s also been shown through research that doctors who continue to learn about medicine and study medical research provide better care to patients overall. If nothing else, making a habit of regular research and study will keep you fresh and up to date on the medical field and its latest developments. "}]">

How to find medical research opportunities

Students who do want to attach some research experience to their applications or resumes often wonder where to start looking. Whether you’re a premed, current med school student or graduate student, gaining some research experience is important for your career. There are a number of places to look for opportunities, but the best ways are to use your network of contacts and ask them for recommendations. There are many programs, internships and study programs which offer research experience of any kind, and your school professors, mentors and advisors will have more insight into where to find them.

Research is a critical and eventual must-have skill and experience for medical school. Whether you add some research experience as a premed, med student or medical graduate depends on where you want to go to school and what your chosen career path as a medical professional will end up being. While you will almost certainly be given some research opportunities in medical school, it’s to your advantage to pursue some outside of your studies as well, to give yourself a competitive advantage in the job market, to continue your lifelong medical learning and to ensure you become the best doctor you can be for your future patients.

Research can a big advantage on both medical school applications and on medical school resumes for graduate medical students. Research experience is also very important to gain during your time at medical school, as it is a foundational skill you will need to become a physician.

Yes; research experience is not a definite requirement at most med schools and students without experience can still be accepted with a strong application. However, good research experience should not be considered a substitute for poor academic performance.

A majority of medical schools don’t require research experience for med school applications, with some exceptions. However, as a matriculating med school student you will be expected to gain research experience and participate in research projects during your school years.

Premed students can find valuable research positions through summer internship programs or by consulting with a college advisor. Professors and mentors are also a good option for finding research opportunities. Premeds can also look into study abroad programs that offer research experience.

No; most medical schools consider direct clinical experience more important than lab or field research for admissions. However, if you plan to apply for medical research positions, to a research-intensive med school program or want to pursue an MD/PhD, then research experience will be considered more important to have.

Research is part of the foundational skills med students will learn and will take with them into their future careers. Research experience can also provide a competitive advantage in the job market and prepare them for residency positions or work as a practicing physician.

Even if this is the case, research is a large part of being a physician and you will be required to gain at least a little experience with medical research throughout your med school career.

Generally speaking, no. Medical schools aren’t picky about the type of research experience you have, or even if the subject of the research undertaken was non-medical. Any research experience is valid.

Want more free tips? Subscribe to our channels for more free and useful content!

Apple Podcasts

Like our blog? Write for us ! >>

Have a question ask our admissions experts below and we'll answer your questions, get started now.

Talk to one of our admissions experts

Our site uses cookies. By using our website, you agree with our cookie policy .

FREE Premeds Research  Webclass :

How to Get the Perfect Premed Research Experience

That Helped Me Get Accepted to SIX Med Schools

Request Information

• Name * First Last
• Anticipated Start Term Year * Anticipated Start Term Year Fall 2024 Spring 2025 Fall 2025 Spring 2026 Fall 2026
• Country Code * Country Code +1 - USA +1 - Canada +91 - India +1 - Caribbean Nations +20 - Egypt +212 - Morocco +213 - Algeria +216 - Tunisia +218 - Libya +220 - Gambia +221 - Senegal +222 - Mauritania +223 - Mali +224 - Guinea +225 - Ivory Coast +226 - Burkina Faso +227 - Niger +228 - Togo (Togolese Republic) +229 - Benin +230 - Mauritius +231 - Liberia +232 - Sierra Leone +233 - Ghana +234 - Nigeria +235 - Chad +236 - Central African Republic +237 - Cameroon +238 - Cape Verdi +239 - Sao Tome and Principe +240 - Equatorial Guinea +241 - Gabon (Gabonese Republic) +242 - Bahamas +242 - Congo +243 - Zaire +244 - Angola +245 - Guinea-Bissau +246 - Barbados +246 - Diego Garcia +247 - Ascension Island +248 - Seychelles +249 - Sudan +250 - Rwanda (Rwandese Republic) +251 - Ethiopia +252 - Somalia +253 - Djibouti +254 - Kenya +255 - Tanzania (includes Zanzibar) +256 - Uganda +257 - Burundi +258 - Mozambique +260 - Zambia +261 - Madagascar +262 - Reunion (France) +263 - Zimbabwe +264 - Namibia +265 - Malawi +266 - Lesotho +267 - Botswana +268 - Antigua +268 - Swaziland +269 - Comoros and Mayotte +269 - Mayolte +27 - South Africa +284 - British Virgin Islands +290 - St. Helena +291 - Eritrea +297 - Aruba +298 - Faroe (Faeroe) Islands (Denmark) +299 - Greenland +30 - Greece +31 - Netherlands +32 - Belgium +33 - France +33 - Monaco +34 - Spain +345 - Cayman Islands +350 - Gibraltar +351 - Portugal (includes Azores) +352 - Luxembourg +353 - Ireland +354 - Iceland +355 - Albania +356 - Malta +357 - Cyprus +358 - Finland +359 - Bulgaria +36 - Hungary +370 - Lithuania +371 - Latvia +372 - Estonia +373 - Moldova +374 - Armenia +375 - Belarus +376 - Andorra +378 - San Marino +380 - Ukraine +381 - Serbia and Montenegro +381 - Yemen (People's Democratic Republic) +385 - Croatia +386 - Slovenia +387 - Bosnia and Hercegovina +389 - Macedonia +39 - Italy +39 - Vatican City +40 - Romania +41 - Switzerland +420 - Czech Republic +421 - Slovakia +423 - Liechtenstein +43 - Austria +44 - United Kingdom +45 - Denmark +46 - Sweden +47 - Norway +473 - Grenada/Carricou +473 - Montserrat +48 - Poland +49 - Germany +500 - Falkland Islands +501 - Belize +502 - Guatemala +503 - El Salvador +504 - Honduras +505 - Nicaragua +506 - Costa Rica +507 - Panama +508 - St. Pierre &(et) Miquelon (France) +509 - Haiti +51 - Peru +52 - Mexico +53 - Cuba +54 - Argentina +55 - Brazil +56 - Chile +57 - Colombia +58 - Venezuela +591 - Bolivia +592 - Guyana +593 - Ecuador +594 - French Guiana +595 - Paraguay +596 - French Antilles +596 - Martinique +597 - Suriname +598 - Uruguay +599 - Netherlands Antilles +60 - Malaysia +61 - Australia +62 - Indonesia +63 - Philippines +64 - New Zealand +65 - Singapore +66 - Thailand +670 - Saipan +671 - Guam +672 - Australian External Territories +673 - Brunei Darussalm +674 - Nauru +675 - Papua New Guinea +676 - Tonga +677 - Solomon Islands +678 - Vanuatu (New Hebrides) +679 - Fiji +680 - Palau +681 - Wallis and Futuna +682 - Cook Islands +683 - Niue +684 - American Samoa +685 - Western Samoa +686 - Kiribati Republic (Gilbert Islands) +687 - New Caledonia +688 - Tuvalu (Ellice Islands) +689 - Tahiti (French Polynesia) +690 - Tokelau +691 - Micronesia +692 - Marshall Islands +7 - Kazakhstan +7 - Russia +7 - Tajikistan +7 - Uzbekistan +767 - Dominca +809 - Anguilla +809 - Bermuda +809 - Dominican Republic +81 - Japan +82 - South Korea +84 - Viet Nam +850 - North Korea +852 - Hong Kong +853 - Macao +855 - Cambodia +855 - Khmer Republic (Cambodia/Kampuchea) +856 - Laos +86 - China (People's Republic) +869 - Nevis +869 - St. Kitts/Nevis +876 - Jamaica +880 - Bangladesh +886 - China-Taiwan +886 - Taiwan +90 - Turkey +92 - Pakistan +93 - Afghanistan +94 - Sri Lanka +95 - Myanmar +960 - Maldives +961 - Lebanon +962 - Jordan +963 - Syrian Arab Republic (Syria) +964 - Iraq +965 - Kuwait +966 - Saudi Arabia +967 - Yemen Arab Republic (North Yemen) +968 - Oman +971 - United Arab Emirates +972 - Israel +973 - Bahrain +974 - Qatar +975 - Bhutan +976 - Mongolia +977 - Nepal +98 - Iran +993 - Turkmenistan +994 - Azerbaijan +995 - Georgia +996 - Kyrgyz Republic
• Opt out of text Opt out of text Yes No
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
• Start Your Application
• Continue Your Application
• Submit Your AMCAS Application
• Submit Your AACOMAS Application
• Submit Your TMDSAS Application
• Submit Your OMSAS Application

How Important Is Research for Medical School?

• Blog & News
• Medical School

Imagine diving into the heart of medical mysteries, uncovering new treatments, and transforming patient care. Well, research does just that, shaping future doctors and contributing to discoveries. But how important is research for medical school?

In this blog post, we’ll explore why research is a cornerstone of medical education and how to find research opportunities as a medical student. Join us as we uncover its impact on teaching essential skills, keeping students on the edge of medical advancements, and boosting residency applications.

✅ Request information on AUA's MD program TODAY!

YOUR PATH TO SUCCESS BEGINS HERE

• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

What Are Research Hours for Medical School?

Research hours refer to the time pre-med students spend conducting scientific studies and investigations. Given its significant role in advancing medicine, participating in research is essential for medical school. Through research projects, students learn to ask questions, gather and analyze data, and draw meaningful conclusions.

Research hours are also crucial to some medical school requirements , making research experience highly valuable for building a strong application. It demonstrates to admissions committees an applicant’s dedication, intellectual curiosity, and ability to contribute to the medical field.

Beyond medical school, having experience in research is a valuable asset in any doctor’s career. It opens opportunities for academic positions, specialized fields, and contributions to medical knowledge through publications and beyond.

Completing research hours is important for many reasons. This experience aids in advancing your medical knowledge, building a network and collaboration, and developing vital skills for success.

1. Advancing Medical Knowledge

Research plays a key role in advancing medical knowledge by helping doctors and scientists discover new information about diseases, treatments, and health conditions. Through research, we learn what causes illnesses, how they spread, and the effective ways of treating or preventing them. This leads to the development of new medications, therapies, and medical technologies. Additionally, researchers gather evidence that improves patient care and outcomes by conducting experiments and clinical trials. Overall, research drives innovation in medicine, leading to better health solutions and improving healthcare.

2. Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills

In terms of student development, research helps develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills by teaching them to ask important questions and seek answers through investigation. When conducting research, students learn to design experiments, analyze data, and interpret results, a process that encourages them to think logically, evaluate evidence, and make informed decisions. Tackling complex problems and finding solutions, helps them improve their ability to approach challenges systematically and creatively. As future medical professionals, these skills are essential for them, enabling effective diagnosis and patient treatment, contributing to advancements in healthcare.

3. Competitive Residency Applications

Research experience helps enhance residency applications, too—a cornerstone in any doctor’s journey. Proving that a candidate has the necessary skills and dedication to the field through research hours can make students strong contenders for finding a match. When applicants have done research, it demonstrates they can think critically, solve problems, and work independently. It also shows they are curious and committed to learning more about medicine. Residency programs value these qualities because they indicate that the candidate can handle complex medical issues and contribute to improving patient care. Additionally, having a research background can make an applicant stand out among others, increasing their chances of getting accepted into competitive residency programs.

4. Preparation for Clinical Practice

Clinical practice is an integral part of medical school, accounting for the last two years of studies. As such, participating in research can help students build essential skills for an effective clinical practice experience. By engaging in research, students learn to design studies and interpret results, which are crucial for diagnosing and treating patients. This experience also ensures they stay informed about the latest medical advancements and treatments. Additionally, research projects develop students’ attention to detail and their ability to make evidence-based decisions. Whether a medical student or a qualified physician, the skills gained from research enhance the quality of patient care and help them stay current with medical innovations. 

5. Networking and Collaboration

Lastly, research provides valuable networking and collaboration opportunities for medical students and professionals. By working on research projects, they connect with experienced researchers, doctors, and specialists in their field. These connections can lead to mentorship, guidance, and future career opportunities. Collaboration with peers and experts helps students learn from different perspectives and improves their teamwork skills. Attending conferences and presenting research findings also allows them to meet other professionals, share ideas, and stay informed about the latest developments in medicine. Overall, research fosters a supportive network that can enhance career growth and professional development.

How Many Research Hours for Medical School?

In general, research experience is more important to schools that are research-oriented than clinically-based ones. Research hour requirements for medical students likewise vary widely depending on the medical school and program. Some schools have specific mandatory research hours, while others may encourage but not require research. Typically, top medical schools and competitive residency programs place a high value on research experience, making it important for students aiming for these paths.

Medical students should check their school’s specific requirements and recommendations as they prepare the application. Even if research is not mandatory, it’s wise to seek out research opportunities. Participating in research can make a significant difference in residency applications and future career prospects.

Regardless of specific requirements, engaging in research is beneficial for developing critical skills, enhancing medical knowledge, and building a strong professional network.

How to Find Medical Research Opportunities?

Students can explore research opportunities through direct contact with research mentors or by joining existing projects offered by universities. 

Faculty Mentors

Seeking guidance from faculty mentors is one effective way of finding research opportunities in medical school. That’s primarily because faculty mentors have experience and knowledge about various ongoing research projects and can help students find ones that match their interests. They can also provide advice on how to get involved, offer support throughout the research process, and help students navigate challenges. To assist them with research opportunities, mentors can introduce students to other researchers and professionals, offering them the chance to engage in research while expanding their network. This guidance makes it easier for students to gain valuable research experience, which is essential for their education and future careers in medicine.

Summer Research Programs

Summer research programs offer medical students great opportunities to gain hands-on research experience. These programs usually last several weeks and are designed to fit into the summer break. They provide a chance to work on real research projects, often under the guidance of experienced mentors, where students can learn valuable skills like data collection, analysis, and scientific writing. Additionally, these programs help students explore specific medical interests, strengthen their resumes, and make their residency applications stand out. Networking opportunities with professionals and peers are also offered, which can be beneficial for future career development.

University Research Programs

Another possible option to gain valuable research experience for medical students is through university research programs. Contrary to a summer research program, this one takes place during the academic year. They can be highly beneficial for students, providing access to a variety of research projects in different medical fields. For instance, students can work alongside experienced faculty and researchers, gaining important skills. Additionally, university research programs often include mentorship, helping students navigate their research and develop professionally. Participating in such programs can also enhance resumes and residency applications, making students more competitive candidates. 

National Institutes of Health (NIH)Programs

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) offers excellent research opportunities for medical students. NIH programs provide hands-on experience in cutting-edge medical research. Students can work in NIH labs, learn from top scientists, and contribute to important studies, allowing them to develop professionally while making their mark in the field. Experience in NIH programs helps students enhance their research skills and expand their network for future career growth. In essence, students get a chance to be part of groundbreaking research and advance their medical knowledge.

The Bottom Line

Research is a vital part of medical education, shaping better doctors and advancing healthcare. By diving into research, medical students learn to ask important questions, analyze data, and find solutions, boosting their critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Research also keeps them updated on the latest medical advancements and treatments. Plus, it enhances their resumes, making them stronger candidates for residencies. 

Embracing research before, during, and after medical school not only enriches education but also sets the foundation for a successful medical career.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs):

Is research really important for medical school.

Yes, research is important as it promotes critical thinking and problem-solving skills, and enhances medical school and residency applications.

What percent of med students do research?

Approximately 20-50% of medical students engage in research during their education.

Is it okay to not do research in medical school?

Yes, it is okay not to do research in medical school, but it may limit opportunities and competitiveness for certain residency programs.

Can I get into med school without research?

It depends on the specific admissions requirements, which vary for medical schools. Generally, you can get into many medical schools without research experience, but having a research background can strengthen your application.

• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Why I Chose AUA:

“I was confident going into AUA because of their leadership. It was clear to me from the beginning that the staff and administration from top to bottom were pioneers and leaders in medical education. They showed a great deal of commitment by investing in constructing a brand new state of the art campus while I was there. Although the new campus opened shortly after I left the island, it was encouraging to watch its construction. It let us know that AUA was committed to investing back into its students, and are here to stay for years to come.”

lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est lorem ipsum dolor est

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs
• How to get involved in...

How to get involved in research as a medical student

• Related content
• Peer review
• Anna Kathryn Taylor , final year medical student 1 ,
• Sarah Purdy , professor of primary care and associate dean 1
• 1 Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK

Participating in research gives students great skills and opportunities. Anna Taylor and Sarah Purdy explain how to get started

This article contains:

-How to get involved with research projects

-Questions to ask yourself before starting research

-What can you get published? Research output

-Advice for contacting researchers

-Different types of research explained

-Stages of research projects

Students often go into medicine because of a desire to help others and improve patients’ physical and mental wellbeing. In the early years of medical school, however, it can seem as if you are not making much difference to patient care. Involvement in research can provide exciting opportunities to work as part of a team, improve career prospects, and most importantly add to the evidence base, leading to better outcomes for patients.

Research is usually multidisciplinary, including clinical academics (medical doctors who spend part of their working life doing research), nurses, patients, scientists, and researchers without a medical background. Involvement in such a team can improve your communication skills and expand your understanding of how a multidisciplinary team works.

Participating in research can also help you to develop skills in writing and critical appraisal through the process of publishing your work. You may be able to present your work at conferences—either as a poster or an oral presentation—and this can provide valuable points for job applications at both foundation programme and core training level. This is particularly important if you are considering a career in academia. You will also develop skills in time management, problem solving, and record keeping. You might discover an area of medicine in which you are keen to carry out further work. For some people, getting involved in research as a medical student can be the first step in an academic career.

Kyla Thomas, National Institute for Health Research clinical lecturer in public …

Log in using your username and password

BMA Member Log In

If you have a subscription to The BMJ, log in:

• Need to activate
• Log in via institution
• Log in via OpenAthens

Log in through your institution

Subscribe from £184 *.

Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.

* For online subscription

Access this article for 1 day for: £50 / $60/ €56 ( excludes VAT )

You can download a PDF version for your personal record.

Buy this article