Peer-Led Versus Conventional Teacher-Led Methodological Research Education Sessions: An Initiative to Improve Medical Education Research Teaching

IntroductionTo enhance doctors' engagement with research, the National Medical Research Association (NMRA) developed a research teaching series, delivering peer-led (PL) sessions by medical students and conventional teacher-led (CL) sessions by licenced physicians/lecturers. We assessed the effectiveness of the series and compared the PL and CL approaches.MethodsThe teaching sessions were delivered virtually via Zoom weekly either PL or CL. Feedback was provided by participants on completion of every session using a 10-point Likert scale assessing their knowledge pre- and post-training.ResultsA total of 87 participants were included generating 782 feedback forms, 367 (47.1%) for PL and 412 for CL sessions. The median knowledge scores significantly increased following each session (p-value < 0.05) independent of teaching approach. An overall improvement in the median knowledge score from all sessions from 5/10 to 8/10 was reported. There was no significant difference between knowledge gained from the CL or PL teaching.ConclusionDidactic PL research training sessions are equally effective as CL sessions.

Automated summary

To enhance doctors' engagement with research, the National Medical Research Association (NMRA) developed a research teaching series, delivering peer-led (PL) sessions by medical students and conventional teacher-led (CL) sessions by licensed physicians/lecturers. We assessed the effectiveness of the series and compared the PL and CL approaches.