Fostering Research Engagement and Ideation: Insights from Medical Students in Thailand
Issued Date
2026-01-01
Resource Type
eISSN
11797258
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-105035123257
Journal Title
Advances in Medical Education and Practice
Volume
17
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Advances in Medical Education and Practice Vol.17 (2026)
Suggested Citation
Plangsiri S., Jirapornsuwan M., Kaewkamjornchai P. Fostering Research Engagement and Ideation: Insights from Medical Students in Thailand. Advances in Medical Education and Practice Vol.17 (2026). doi:10.2147/AMEP.S591142 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/116187
Title
Fostering Research Engagement and Ideation: Insights from Medical Students in Thailand
Author(s)
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: Research plays a vital role in fostering critical thinking among medical students, while also strengthening related skills such as writing, communication, collaboration, and project management. Beyond skill development, research experiences can serve as valuable credentials and inspire future career paths. Despite these benefits, students often face challenges in identifying thought-provoking topics and securing suitable mentors. This study explores how medical students generate research ideas and establish connections with advisors, with the goal of identifying actionable institutional strategies to enhance research engagement. Methods: Quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews were conducted sequentially, focusing on the 2023 cohort of third-year medical students who were required to complete a research proposal as part of their graduation requirements. Quantitative data were summarized as counts, percentages, means, and standard deviations. To complement these findings, qualitative interview data were analyzed independently by two investigators using reflexive thematic analysis to contextualize and extend the quantitative findings. Results: Quantitative data from 139 students revealed that the most important factors for generating research ideas were discussions with professors, literature reviews, and attendance at research seminars. Advisors for first research projects were usually class professors, while advisors for subsequent projects were obtained through recommendations. Qualitative interviews with 19 students reflected the survey results while also uncovering additional factors not captured in the survey options, such as assisted advisor matching systems or invitations from previous advisors to collaborate on new projects. The interviews also revealed students’ perspectives on how effectively the curriculum facilitated professor matching and their personal experiences with research advisors. Additionally, while many participants expressed a personal interest in research, the majority opposed making research a mandatory requirement in medical school. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that strengthening faculty-student interactions, maintaining accessible platforms, and optimizing research seminars can enhance student satisfaction and the overall quality of undergraduate research.