Framework for impact: evaluating research methodology workshop using CIPP model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20251639Keywords:
Biostatistics, CIPP model, Medical education, Undergraduate students, Research methodology, Online workshopAbstract
Background: Research is an integral part of medical education, yet medical students often lack sufficient research skills, hindering evidence-based medicine. Research methodology workshop aim to enhance these competencies, but their effectiveness requires systematic evaluation. This study assessed the impact of an online research methodology and biostatistics workshop for final year undergraduate medical students using the content, input, process and product (CIPP) evaluation model.
Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted among 2,982 final-year Part-I undergraduate medical students from colleges affiliated with The Tamil Nadu Dr. M. G. R Medical University. The intervention involved periodic online workshops with interactive sessions led by expert facilitators. A 15-item semi-structured questionnaire was administered pre- and post-workshop to assess knowledge. The CIPP model guided evaluation.
Results: A significant improvement in research knowledge was observed following the workshop. The mean pre-test score increased from 7.67±3.22 to 9.37±2.20 post-test. The proportion of students scoring above the mean increased from 34.6% to 54.2%. Participants reported increased confidence in identifying study designs, formulating research questions, and interpreting statistical data. Qualitative feedback highlighted the workshop’s relevance, engagement, and value in fostering a research-oriented mindset.
Conclusions: The online workshop effectively enhanced research knowledge and competencies among medical students. Using the CIPP model, demonstrated the workshop’s role in fostering evidence-based practice and research culture. Early exposure to research methodology is vital for developing clinicians capable of contributing to medical advancements. Future studies should explore the long-term impact on research engagement and clinical practice.
Metrics
References
Igbokwe M, Adebayo O, Ogunsuji O, Popoola G, Babalola R, Oiwoh SO, et al. An exploration of profile, perceptions, barriers, and predictors of research engagement among resident doctors: a report from CHARTING study. Perspect Clin Res. 2022;13(2):106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_152_20
Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care. The lancet. 2003;362(9391):1225-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1
Gandhi P. Clinical research methodology. Indian J Phar Edu Res. 2011;45(2):199-209.
Sitzia J. Barriers to research utilisation: the clinical setting and nurses themselves. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2002;18(4):230-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0964339702000125
Johal S. Assessing the impact of workshops promoting concepts of psychosocial support for emergency events. PLoS Curr. 2012;4:e4fd80324dd362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/4fd80324dd362
Musal B, Taskiran C, Gursel Y, Ozan S, Timbil S, Velipasaoglu S. An example of program evaluation project in undergraduate medical education. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2008;21(1):113.
Moghadas-Dastjerdi T, Omid A, Yamani N. Evaluation of health experts’ education program for becoming multiprofessionals (family health caregiver) regarding health system transformation plan: An application of CIPP model. J Educ Health Promot. 2020;9(1):227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_75_20
Sancar Tokmak H, Baturay HM, Fadde P. Applying the context, input, process, product evaluation model for evaluation, research, and redesign of an online master’s program. Internat Revi Res Open Distribut Learn. 2013;14(3):273-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i3.1485
Schwartz AR, Siegel MD, Lee AI. A novel approach to the program evaluation committee. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19:1-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1899-x
Kim CJ, Mo H, Lee JY. Evaluation of an ultrasound program in nationwide Continuing Professional Development (CPD) in Korean public health and medical institutions. BMC Medical Education. 2022;22(1):261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03271-4
The World Federation for Medical Education. Basic medical education WFME global standards for quality improvement: The 2020 Revision. Available at: https://wfme.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/WFME-BME-Standards-2020.pdf. Accessed 01 January 2025.
Kumar D, Singh US, Solanki R. Assessment of a group activity based educational method to teach research methodology to undergraduate Medical Students of a Rural Medical College in Gujarat, India. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(7):LC01-03. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/12854.6154
Shrivastava M, Shah N, Navaid S. Assessment of change in knowledge about research methods among delegates attending research methodology workshop. Perspectives in Clinical Research. 2018;9(2):83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_41_17
Khan H, Khawaja MR. Impact of a workshop on the knowledge and attitudes of medical students regarding health research. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2007;17(1):59.
Lee SY, Kim S, Kim S, Shin Y, Yim JJ, Hwang H, et al. Assessing statistical literacy in medical students and doctors: a single-centre, cross-sectional survey in South Korea. BMJ Open. 2025;15(4):e095173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-095173
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
