MYHealth Impact Projects: A Mixed Methods Evaluation of an Online Research Training Program for Adolescents
Résumé fourni par la source
Biomedical research is essential to healthcare and medicine. However, challenges in training and decreasing persistence among trainees have contributed to the U.S. ongoing healthcare crisis. MYHealth Impact Projects is a 9-month online research training program for adolescents where twenty-two participants used a nationwide text message poll to complete a team-based adolescent health research project. We conducted a mixed methods evaluation to assess engagement and changes in participants' researcher identity and self-efficacy, science motivation, and science literacy, including: 1) pre-, mid- and post-surveys, 2) program participation, and 3) semi-structured interviews. We used Kruskal-Wallis rank tests to compare changes over time. We conducted inductive thematic analysis on qualitative data and integrated final themes with the quantitative results for mixed methods inferences. Participants completed an average of 17.8 hours in bi-weekly sessions (28.75 hours max). There were statistically significant increases in researcher identity and science literacy. Salient themes included: 1) dispelling preconceived notions of being a researcher, 2) building research literacy through hands-on experience, 3) developing self-efficacy through an environment that supports autonomy, and 4) emerging interest in research careers through near-future goals. These findings emphasize the importance of hands-on and authentic learning in research training.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- MYHealth Impact Projects: A Mixed Methods Evaluation of an Online Research Training Program for Adolescents
- Date Crossref
- 30/06/2026
- Éditeur
- Vanderbilt University Library
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.