Table 4.
Residents’ evaluation and recommendation of the program
| 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) |
RRP: Residency Research Program