Journal of Cancer Education

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 84–92 | Cite as

An Evaluation Methodology for Longitudinal Studies of Short-Term Cancer Research Training Programs

  • Luz A. Padilla
  • Raam Venkatesh
  • Casey L. Daniel
  • Renee A. Desmond
  • C. Michael Brooks
  • John W. WaterborEmail author


The need to familiarize medical students and graduate health professional students with research training opportunities that cultivate the appeal of research careers is vital to the future of research. Comprehensive evaluation of a cancer research training program can be achieved through longitudinal tracking of program alumni to assess the program’s impact on each participant’s career path and professional achievements. With advances in technology and smarter means of communication, effective ways to track alumni have changed. In order to collect data on the career outcomes and achievements of nearly 500 short-term cancer research training program alumni from 1999–2013, we sought to contact each alumnus to request completion of a survey instrument online, or by means of a telephone interview. The effectiveness of each contact method that we used was quantified according to ease of use and time required. The most reliable source of contact information for tracking alumni from the early years of the program was previous tracking results, and for alumni from the later years, the most important source of contact information was university alumni records that provided email addresses and telephone numbers. Personal contacts with former preceptors were sometimes helpful, as were generic search engines and people search engines. Social networking was of little value for most searches. Using information from two or more sources in combination was most effective in tracking alumni. These results provide insights and tools for other research training programs that wish to track their alumni for long-term program evaluation.


Cancer research training Program evaluation NCI R25 program 



The authors wish to thank our website manager Mr. Gregory Caudle of the UAB School of Public Health for his invaluable contributions, and Charles T. Prickett, M.P.H., for his assistance managing data from our earlier study.


  1. 1.
    Jimmy R, Palatty PL, D’Silva P, Baliga MS, Singh A (2013) Are medical students inclined to do research? J Clin Diagn Res 7(12):2892–5. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/6698.3786, PMID: 24551667PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Solomon SS, Tom SC, Pichert J, Wasserman D (2003) Impact of medical student research in the development of physician-scientists. J Investig Med 51(3):149–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Khadaroo RG, Rotstein OD (2002) Are clinician-scientists an endangered species? Barriers to clinician-scientist training. Clin Invest Med 25(6):260–1PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Culliton BJ, D’Auria J (1998) The physician-scientist really is an endangered species. J Investig Med 46(9):417–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mostafa SR, Khashab SK, Fouaad AS, Abdel Baky MA, Waly AM (2006) Engaging undergraduate medical students in health research: students’ perceptions and attitudes, and evaluation of a training workshop on research methodology. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 81(1–2):99–118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Oliveira NA, Luz MR, Saraiva RM, Alves LA (2011) Student views of research training programmes in medical schools. Med Educ 45(7):748–755CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burgoyne LN, O’Flynn S, Boylan GB (2010) Undergraduate medical research: the student perspective. Med Educ Online 10:15. doi: 10.3402/meo.v15i0.5212, PMID: 20844608Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nikkar-Esfahani A, Jamjoom AA, Fitzgerald JE (2012) Extracurricular participation in research and audit by medical students: opportunities, obstacles, motivation and outcomes. Med Teach 34(5):e317–24. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.670324 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farooq Sheikh AS, Sheikh SA, Kaleem A, Waqas A. Factors contributing to lack of interest in research among medical students Adv Med Educ Pract. 2013; 4: 237–243. Published online Nov 7, 2013. doi:  10.2147/AMEP.S51536 PMCID: PMC3826903.
  10. 10.
    Committee C, Institute for International Medical Education (2002) Global minimum essential requirements in medical education. Med Teach 24(2):130–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leonard JC, Ellsbury KE (1996) Gender and interest in academic careers among first- and third-year residents. Acad Med 71(5):502–504CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    She L, Wu B, Xu L, Wu J, Zhang P, Li E (2008) Determinants of career aspirations of medical students in southern China. BMC Med Educ 8:59PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Naqvi HA (2010) Students’ research: tradition ahead of its time. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 20(10):701–2. doi: 10.2010/JCPSP.701702 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harsha Kumar H, Jayaram S, Kumar GS, Vinita J, Rohit S, Satish M, Shusruth K, Nitin A (2009) Perception, practices towards research and predictors of research career among UG medical students from coastal south India: a cross-sectional study. Indian J Community Med 34(4):306–9PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Langhammer CG, Garg K, Neubauer JA, Rosenthal S, Kinzy TG (2009) Medical student research exposure via a series of modular research programs. J Investig Med 57(1):11–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zier K, Wyatt C, Muller D (2012) An innovative portfolio of research training programs for medical students. Immunol Res 54(1-3):286–291. doi: 10.1007/s12026-012-8310-x, Review. PMID: 22418729PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hunskaar S, Breivik J, Siebke M, Tømmerås K, Figenschau K, Hansen JB (2009) Evaluation of the medical student research programme in Norwegian medical schools. A survey of students and supervisors. BMC Med Educ 9:43PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    National Institutes of Health. Types of grant funding. Accessed on October 30, 2014.
  19. 19.
    Heimburger DC, Waterbor J, Fish L, Brooks CM (2000) Cancer prevention and control training program at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. J Cancer Educ 15(2):69–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heimburger DC, Waterbor JW, Fish L, Brooks CM (2000) An interdisciplinary training program in nutrition sciences and cancer. J Cancer Educ 15(3):130–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Daniel CL, Brooks CM, Waterbor JW (2011) Approaches for longitudinally tracking graduates of NCI-funded short-term cancer research training programs. J Cancer Educ 26:58–63PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Desmond RA, Padilla LA, Daniel C, Prickett, CT, Venkatesh R, Brooks CM, and Waterbor, JW. Career outcomes of graduates of R25E short-term cancer research training programs. [Submitted]Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Drupal Content management system:; Webform module:; Webform Encryption Module:; MCRYPT:; MySQL Database: Accessed on October 31, 2014.
  24. 24.
    Wikipedia: Google search. Accessed on October 28, 2014.
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Wikipedia: Facebook. Accessed on October 28, 2014.
  27. 27.
    LinkedIn: World’s Largest Professional Network. Accessed on October 30, 2014.
  28. 28.
    Instructional Assessment Resources: response rates. Accessed on October 30, 2014.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luz A. Padilla
    • 1
  • Raam Venkatesh
    • 2
  • Casey L. Daniel
    • 3
  • Renee A. Desmond
    • 4
  • C. Michael Brooks
    • 5
  • John W. Waterbor
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of EpidemiologyUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA
  2. 2.School of MedicineUniversity of AlabamaBirminghamUSA
  3. 3.School of Public HealthHarvard UniversityBostonUSA
  4. 4.Division of Preventive Medicine, Department of MedicineUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA
  5. 5.School of Health ProfessionsUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUSA

Personalised recommendations