Integrating research into medical education: the conceptualization and establishment of a student-led undergraduate (UG) research committee in India

Abstract

Objective

Undergraduate (UG) research offers early exposure to clinical and evidence-based medicine (EBM), yet participation among UG medical students remains limited due to inadequate structural guidance and mentorship. Developing research aptitude early in medical training is now essential, making it necessary for medical colleges to create institutional frameworks that support and nurture student research. This descriptive mixed-methods program-evaluation study was conducted at a government medical college and tertiary-care hospital in western India over five years (February 2020–September 2025). It documents the conceptualization, establishment, and progressive self-reported outcomes of “JIGNYASA: The UG Research Committee”.

Results

The student-led, senior-mentored model resulted in a marked rise in research engagement: 228 student-initiated research projects, 34 grant approvals, and 59 publications were achieved. Key contributors to success included ongoing research-promotion activities, round-the-clock guidance, and continuous feedback-based restructuring. The blueprint highlights the committee’s foundation, challenges, milestones, and its replicable structure, offering a sustainable model for medical institutions aiming to establish student-driven research platforms with minimal financial requirements.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13104-026-07758-x.

Introduction

Research remains essential across all stages of medical training, yet its importance is often understated. At the undergraduate (UG) level, research provides early exposure to clinical practice and evidence-based medicine (EBM) [1].

A review by Ray et al. examining 579 Indian medical institutions reported that 57.3% had no publications, a striking contrast to the annual research output of global leaders such as Massachusetts General Hospital (4600 publications) and Mayo Clinic (3700 publications) [2]. UG research involvement in India also remains low with available data showing participation rates of 8.3% in a Tamil Nadu medical college, 16.9% in a Delhi college, and 25.25% nationally, with only 21.3% of students having published work [3–5].

Most of the existing international research is not directly generalisable to the Indian context due to differences in health systems, culture, biology, and socioeconomic factors, and continued underinvestment in research may lead to significant public-health consequences [6].

Common barriers to UG research include inadequate mentorship, lack of structured research programs, limited awareness, and insufficient research skills or motivation [7–10]. To address these challenges, the authors—then undergraduate students—founded “JIGNYASA”, a UG research committee (Sanskrit for “curiosity to know”) in February 2020 at a government medical college and tertiary-care hospital in India. The onset of COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the urgent need for clinical and translational research, further catalysed the initiative [11].

This article outlines the committee’s formation, structure, and progress using a program-evaluation framework, demonstrating an approach to strengthen UG research culture in Indian medical institutions. This work is the first of its kind to provide a detailed, replicable blueprint for establishing such committees nationwide without major funding or administrative dependence, flexible initiative schedules, feedback based restructuring, driven by peer motivation, vertical mentorship, and collaborative networks.

Main text

Methods

Study design

This was a descriptive mixed-methods program evaluation study covering five years (February 2020 – September 2025) and documented the conceptualization, establishment, and progressive self-reported outcomes of “JIGNYASA: The UG Research Committee”.

Study setting

The study was carried out at a government medical college and tertiary-care teaching hospital in western India.

Conceptual framework (formation of JIGNYASA- The UG Research Committee)

The committee was envisioned as a student-driven (for students- by students), senior-mentored model. It followed a “Build–Engage–Sustain” framework consisting of three progressive stages [12]:

1. Build: Creation of an operational structure, recruitment of motivated students, and allocation of roles.

2. Engage: Conduction of structured research activities (lectures, workshops, journal clubs, etc.) and establishment of mentorship networks.

3. Sustain: Periodic evaluation of outcomes, feedback-based restructuring, and long-term integration into the institutional ecosystem.

Organizational structure

At its inception, the UG Research Committee consisted of a Core Team and eight working teams whose names and functions are detailed in Additional File 1. The committee is led by a Research Secretary under the guidance of a Research Advisor (a permanent faculty member) and Senior Advisors, who are UG students or alumni serving as student mentors. They collectively set the annual vision, coordinate activities, and uphold academic integrity. The Research Secretary—typically a 2nd/3rd year MBBS student selected by faculty—serves for one year. The Core Team comprises of motivated UG students and Senior Advisors.

Alongside the physical organization of the committee, its social media presence was also established. WhatsApp groups were created with the intent of solving doubts, sharing research opportunities and events conducted by the committee, creating mentorship networks, and unifying students sharing the common aspiration of medical research. An Instagram page and a YouTube page by the name of ‘JIGNYASA: The UG Research Committee’ were created to share posts and videos on the basics of research methodology, stories and experiences of students who have done research projects, recent research updates and developments, research opportunities, short quizzes, and conduct online events and guest lectures [13, 14].

The current structure of the committee is depicted in Fig. 1. This revised structure was developed based on continuous student feedback to improve efficiency, reduce redundancy, and optimize resource utilization (Table 1). The Core Team manages administrative tasks, monitors team functioning, and resolves conflicts. Each working team is led by a student coordinator, reinforcing participatory leadership and peer-mentoring. A “vertical membership chain” allows senior UG members to mentor newer recruits, ensuring continuity and leadership development.

Fig. 1.

Structure of the UG Research Committee: JIGNYASA

Table 1.

Functions of the 5 working teams of JIGNYASA

S. No.	Name of the Team	Functions
1	Resource and Publications Team	• Frequently conduct senior-mentored ‘Journal Club’ meetings to discuss articles and their relevant research methodology. • Disseminate informative content on the basics of research methodology, updates in medical research, and virtual journal club articles on social media. • Facilitate students in the conduct and publication of research. • Function as a student support group to aid students with institutional ethics committee (IEC) approval, ICMR-STS projects, Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) Research projects and competitions, and various other research opportunities at the UG level.
2	Events and Activities Team	• Plan and organize research committee events, oral/poster/case presentations, and intra-college competitions. • Collect continuous feedback from students to improve the functioning of the committee.
3	Technical Team	• Design educational and promotional content such as posts, stories, and videos for social media platforms like YouTube and Instagram. • Manage and conduct online events and handle their live streaming and recordings on platforms like Zoom (Free Version)/Google Meet, YouTube, etc.
4	Symposium Team	• Facilitating the students in the preparation and production of medical and research symposia in collaboration with the academic council of the college.
5	Outreach and Collaboration Team	• Hosting guest lectures, national and international collaborations, and interdisciplinary teamwork.

Faculty advisors act as academic anchors, offering ethical guidance, methodological support, and alignment with Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) standards. Importantly, the faculty role remains facilitative rather than directive, allowing the organization to maintain its “student-driven” ethos.

Study participants

The study included UG medical students from first year to final year, including interns of the institution. Membership was open to them on a voluntary basis. Orientation drives, online invitations, and social-media announcements facilitated enrolment. Informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in the study.

Data collection

Participation data were recorded annually through event attendance registers and online group analytics. Quantitative indicators were retrieved from verified institutional and committee archives and qualitative data analysis was done from online feedback forms distributed to participants after each event. Social-media analytics were extracted directly from verified platform dashboards.

Indicators

To assess the effectiveness of the committee, the following quantitative indicators were tracked over 5 years:

1. Research Output and Scholarly Impact: Increase in the number of student-initiated research projects, grant applications (ICMR Short Term Studentship (STS) Program and other agencies) and approvals, awards received, publications, and conference presentations.

2. Engagement Metrics: Attendance per JIGNYASA event (offline/online- Zoom (Free Version)/Google Meet).

3. Education and Training Metrics: Number and category of academic activities (event count) conducted (lectures, workshops, journal clubs, guest lectures, debates).

4. Social Media Metrics: Total membership of the committee’s WhatsApp groups, growth in social-media followers and posts and, online recorded lecture viewership/video views.

5. Sustainability Indicators: Number of active senior mentors after completing graduation.

Analysis

All data was analysed using Microsoft Excel and presented as numbers and percentages. To minimize recall bias, cross-verification was carried out between event registers, institutional research grant records, and meetings between the research secretary and advisors. Any discrepancies were resolved by consensus between the Research Secretary and the Research Advisor. Furthermore, Self-reported qualitative data collection was limited to immediate post-event surveys (distributed < 24 h post-event, completed within 48 h).

Qualitative analysis

Design

A qualitative thematic analysis approach was chosen to understand the impact of committee’s activities on the change in level of confidence and understanding of research methodology amongst UG students, and perceived usefulness and areas of improvement in the committee’s initiatives. The report of this study follows the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist [15].

Participants

We used a convenience sampling method wherein UG medical students who attended events organized by the committee were disseminated post-session feedback surveys via WhatsApp.

Data collection

The researchers have not received specialized training in qualitative research but have adhered and referred to the practical qualitative thematic analysis guide [16]. This study employed an online survey approach with open ended questions assessing perceived usefulness, motivation, and suggestions for improvement for the research committee’s initiatives. Students were given an option of either completing the survey immediately post the session in the lecture theatre itself or later from the comfort of their homes.

Data analysis

We used Microsoft Excel to code and manage all the survey data. This study adopted the modified qualitative practical reflexive thematic analysis, originally proposed by Braun and Clarke [17]. One researcher analyzed the data. Initial coding and line-by-line inductive coding were employed to generate 9 broad codes and 44 specific codes. In total, 96 survey responses were included in the study.

Results

At present, ‘JIGNYASA: The UG Research Committee’, headed by the research secretary, mentored by the research advisor and senior advisors, consists of the core team and 5 working teams, comprising of a total of 29 members. Research activity and participation rose steadily across five years with the trend in student research engagement and scholarly outputs depicted in Table 2. All other quantitative indicators are depicted in Table 3 and Additional File 2. Baseline (pre-intervention) data was not available.

Table 2.

Five-year trend in student research engagement and scholarly outputs

Outcome indicator	2020–21	2021–22	2022–23	2023–24	2024–25
Number of participants sampled	43	48	51	55	64	Total (N = 261)
Number of research projects initiated	12	28	42	64	82	228 projects by 118/261 (45.2%) students
Grant applications submitted	2	6	8	13	15	44 (16.9%)
Grant approvals obtained	1	8	8	7	10	34 (13.0%)
Conference presentations	3	5	8	9	13	38 (14.6%)
Peer-reviewed publications (indexed)	4	5	8	16	20	53 (20.3%)

Table 3.

Results of Program Evaluation of JIGNYASA

S. No.	Outcome Indicator	Result
Engagement Metrics
2.	Attendance per JIGNYASA event	65
Education and Training Metrics
1.	Number and category of academic activities conducted (event count)	Lectures- 35 Workshops- 12 Journal Clubs- 12 Guest Lectures- 16 Debates-8
Sustainability Indicators
1.	Number of active senior student mentors	4

The online and offline events conducted by the committee are depicted in Fig. 2. The Basics of Research Methodology Lecture Series comprises of 6 comprehensive sessions: ‘Introduction to Research’, ‘How to choose Research Topic?’, ‘Research Overview and Abstract Writing’, ‘Reference Styling and Literature Search’, ‘Study Designs and Research Article Reading’, and ‘Systematic Review and Literature Search’.

Fig. 2.

Initiatives of JIGNYASA

The qualitative thematic analysis of student narratives revealed consistent evidence of attitudinal transformation. Representative responses are summarized in Additional File 3 (anonymized for confidentiality).

Discussion

In an era where evidence-based medicine defines healthcare quality, developing research aptitude during undergraduate training is essential. JIGNYASA addresses this gap by offering a sustainable, student-led, and easily replicable model that converts curiosity into research competency.

Program evaluation shows increased research output, engagement, and continuity among UG students. A key strength of JIGNYASA is its innovative digital presence. Social media platforms such as Instagram and YouTube were transformed into micro-learning spaces, enabling widespread access to research concepts and reaching students remotely [18, 19].

Unlike traditional top-down research cells, JIGNYASA is driven by a peer-mentorship chain where students learn, lead, and teach simultaneously [20]. Alumni involvement ensures continuity, strengthens feedback-based restructuring, and facilitates easier access to faculty mentors.

The creation and sustenance of such committees often face financial, administrative, and institutional barriers (Fig. 3) [21]. JIGNYASA overcame these through resource sharing, persistent dialogue with faculty to gain official recognition, and reliance on low-cost digital platforms such as Zoom and Google Meet. Academic calendar constraints were addressed by decentralizing leadership, offering flexible micro-roles, and aligning activities with college schedules. To nurture intrinsic motivation, the committee conducted quizzes, case discussions, and hypothesis-building activities, shifting the focus from résumé building to genuine curiosity and growth.

Fig. 3.

Barriers faced in the functioning of JIGNYASA

A.S.P.I.R.E from Mumbai, India also operates on a similar peer-based mentoring model but has a rigid yearlong teaching curriculum. In terms of research practices, in their self-evaluation study cohort of 2 years, 44 research projects were initiated by 29/92 (31.5%) students [21, 22]. College Research and Innovation Hub (CRIH) from Nigeria is a similar student led research committee operating through a well-organized structure centered on journal clubs. Their member collaborations with other colleagues and faculty members have led to the publication of over 40 papers in peer-reviewed journals [23]. Various other student-led research committees exist in India and globally like the GENESIS at a medical college in India, Satyanveshi from Maulana Azad Medical College, India, STARSurg collaborative from the UK, and a student-run research organization from Norfolk, USA but the strength of JIGNYASA lies in its simplicity: it functions without major funding or administrative dependence, driven instead by peer motivation, vertical mentorship, collaborative networks, and a flexible schedule [24–27]. This structure aligns with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and ICMR-STS initiatives that emphasize early research sensitization, demonstrating that meaningful research training can begin at the undergraduate level without burdening the curriculum [28]. Furthermore, none provide a detailed, replicable blueprint for establishing such committees nationwide. If adopted across institutions, JIGNYASA-like frameworks could contribute to a national UG research consortium.

The post COVID-19 period may also contribute to increased student research activity in the study period. We interpret that the period appears to have acted as a catalyst for the JIGNYASA initiative. While the resumption of academic activities likely increased baseline student interest in research, the structured framework provided by JIGNYASA enabled this renewed enthusiasm to be effectively channelled into sustained and multiplied scholarly activity.

Future plans include strengthening UG research culture through more frequent journal clubs, developing a UG research e-journal, and formalizing student research societies. JIGNYASA also intends to expand digital engagement through platforms that deliver research education via short “Research in a Minute” videos and monthly live Q&A sessions.

Ultimately, the goal is to offer a replicable framework that can guide other medical colleges seeking to initiate or strengthen UG research committees, promoting a nationwide culture of inquiry-driven medical education.

Limitations

The absence of baseline (pre-intervention) quantitative data on research knowledge limited statistical comparisons. Outcomes relied on self-reported activity logs and institutional records, which may underreport informal projects. Nonetheless, triangulation from multiple sources and consistent upward trends lend credibility to the findings.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Abbreviations

UG

Undergraduate

EBM

Evidence-based medicine

ICMR

Indian Council of Medical Research

STS

Short-term studentship

Author contributions

Conceptualisation: RP, NK, MR, MJ. Data curation: All authors. Formal analysis: MJ, MR; Funding acquisition: N/A. Investigation: All authors. Methodology: RP, NK, MR, MJ; Software: N/A. Validation: RP, NK, MR. Visualisation: RP, NK, MR, MJ. Writing-original draft: MJ, NK. Writing-review & editing- All authors. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

No specific funding was obtained for this manuscript.

Data availability

The data supporting the findings of this study are derived from internal institutional records of JIGNYASA and are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval was taken from the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) of Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Government Medical College (B.J.G.M.C.) & Sassoon General Hospitals (S.G.H.) Pune, Maharashtra, India. Students who gave informed consent to participate in the study were included [29]. The study adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki on the conduct of research on humans and/or human data.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors have been or are members of Jignyasa: The UG Research Committee.