Skip to main content

Table 4 Residents’ evaluation and recommendation of the program

From: Structure and evaluation of a residency research program in a university hospital

RRP Evaluation and recommendations

N = 103

Evaluation

Mean ± SD

 I will carry out research in the future

78.8 ± 15.0

 The FRRP is an important component of the curriculum

77.1 ± 20.1

 I have the expertise to initiate a research project

76.3 ± 16.3

 The FRRP was not a waste of my time

73.2 ± 22.5

 I have the expertise to finalize a research project

72.8 ± 17.7

 I have the expertise to present in national and international conferences

72.8 ± 19.6

 The FRRP enhanced my interest in research

71.3 ± 22.0

 The time allocated for the FRRP could not have been utilized for better purposes

70.1 ± 23.1

 I have the expertise to publish in medical journals

65.3 ± 21.6

Total Score

73.0 ± 12.6

Recommendations

N (%)

 More teaching in data analysis is required

91 (89.2)

 More teaching in paper writing is required

84 (83.2)

 A dedicated time needs to be given when joining the RRP

75 (73.5)

 More time needs to be given to do the RRP project

62 (60.8)

 Supervisors needs to be more aware and committed to the projects

54 (52.9)

 RRP kept as it is

43 (42.6)

 RRP made an optional part of the curriculum

39 (38.6)

 RRP cancelled from the curriculum

9 (8.9)

  1. RRP: Residency Research Program