Scientific Production and Perception of Research among Students from Seven Dentistry Faculties in Peru

Producción científica y percepción sobre la investigación en estudiantes de siete facultades de Odontología del Perú

Jesús Giancarlo Pares-Ballasco

Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Peru

María Ximena Sihuay-Torres

National Scientific Association of Dentistry Students, Peru

Rosa Lara-Verastegui

National Scientific Association of Dentistry Students, Peru

Manuel Antonio Mattos-Vela mmattosv@unmsm.edu.pe

Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Peru

Scientific research holds a pivotal role in the education of undergraduate students in health sciences. It facilitates the development of skills and abilities for independent inquiry, equips them with competencies to critically assess literature, fosters a deeper reflection and analysis to form judgments, encourages the application of the scientific method, enhances their organizational skills, and promotes the development and internalization of autonomous learning activities. These activities are perceived as an inherent part of their medical training, bolstering their understanding and integration of new knowledge into their clinical practice and laying a stronger foundation for postgraduate studies ^1-3.

At present, studies conducted in universities from various countries, including China, Malaysia, the United States, Cuba, and Peru, indicate that dentistry students exhibit a keen interest in scientific research and can significantly contribute to the genesis of new knowledge ^1,4-7. However, these students often report numerous challenges encountered during their undergraduate journey, such as time constraints, lack of proper guidance, inadequate or just average knowledge and skills pertaining to scientific research, absence of incentives, and funding shortages ^1,4,5. This scenario potentially highlights a gap in integrating research within the curriculum, potentially compromising the training of future scientists.

Scientific production involves a spectrum of activities, many of which can be undertaken by students: participating in research groups, initiating student scientific journals, spearheading research projects, publishing articles, among other endeavors ⁸. Within the context of Latin America and the Caribbean, it is noteworthy that student contributions to 20 dentistry journals indexed in SciELO account for 2.3% of the articles published between 2005-2017 ⁹. In Peru specifically, a mere 3.5% of dentistry students have reported publications ¹⁰. Furthermore, the majority of student scientific societies in dentistry (or research groups) in Peru were established in 2020, and to date, there’s no Peruvian student dental journal, in contrast to Chile, which boasts the ANACEO journal ¹¹.

Literature showcases that the incorporation of scientific research in advanced dental education in Peru is lagging, and there’s limited encouragement to publish standard academic works, such as theses or other similar projects ^10,12. In various countries, the interest and perception of students in fields like stomatology, dental hygiene, and dentistry regarding research have been explored ^1,4-6; despite this, evidence specific to Latin America and, more so, Peru remains scant and largely anecdotal. Additionally, there’s limited research contrasting student scientific production with perceptions about research during undergraduate programs. For instance, a study by Castro Rodríguez et al. ¹⁰ delved into this subject within a Peruvian dentistry faculty. The understanding of students’ perceptions towards scientific research across diverse regions of Peru remains elusive as studies concerning national dental scientific production suggest that this challenge is not confined to a singular Peruvian institution. With an intent to sketch a comprehensive landscape of the Peruvian scenario, this study aimed to ascertain the scientific output and research perceptions among students from seven dentistry faculties in Peru.

This research is poised to offer valuable insights when redirecting or reformulating the conventional approach to teaching scientific research within academic and clinical modules. It can aid in crafting educational proposals that align with student needs, inviting them to immerse in research activities and ultimately striving for a top-tier dental education.

A multicentric, descriptive, and cross-sectional study was conducted. The study population consisted of undergraduate students from seven faculties of dentistry from the following Peruvian universities (abbreviation-city): Federico Villarreal National University (UNFV-Lima), National University of San Marcos (UNMSM-Lima), National University San Luis Gonzaga (UNICA-Ica), San Juan Bautista University (USJB-Ica), National University of the Altiplano (UNA-Puno), Andean University Néstor Cáceres Velásquez (UANCV-Juliaca), and Peruvian University of the Andes (UPLA-Huancayo). The first four are situated in the coastal region, and the last three in the Sierra (Andean) region of Peru. The country’s major cities, with a larger population and economic development, are located on the coast.

For the development of this study, collaboration was obtained from the Permanent Department of Scientific Research of the National Association of Dentistry Students of Peru, which is comprised of students from each of the seven faculties of dentistry aforementioned. Thus, the research team collaborated with students from each of the faculties who were trained in survey techniques ¹¹.

All dentistry students (from the first to the sixth year of studies) enrolled in academic Cycles I and II of 2020 were included, excluding those who chose not to participate in the study. Even though students in their first two years might have less knowledge about research and chances of publication, they were included in this study to capture a comprehensive view of the variables studied and to compare results with other studies that also included these students. A non-probabilistic sampling type was chosen due to the social isolation and physical distancing measures implemented by the Peruvian government as preventive actions against COVID-19.

Evaluation by a research ethics committee was deemed unnecessary due to the low risk to the study subjects. Data collection was done through a survey; however, consent to participate in the study was requested at the beginning of the questionnaire, ensuring confidentiality of the information provided among other assurances.

A questionnaire adapted from the study by Castro-Rodríguez et al. ⁸ was used, which was prepared using Google Forms. A pilot was previously conducted with 12 students applying the virtual form, noting certain annotations applied in the final execution.

The instrument consisted of 15 questions divided into four sections. The first section collected information about age, gender, university of origin, academic year, and participation in research groups. The second section evaluated student perception through interest in research, the importance of publishing, and the limitations for research during undergraduate studies. The third section assessed the students’ self-perception through questions with gradual responses (none and deficient, regular, good, and very good) regarding knowledge of research methodology, scientific writing, and information search. The fourth section evaluated scientific production through academic works, publication of scientific articles, and the type of article published. The DOI or article title was also requested to verify the information provided.

The questionnaire was delivered to each participant via social media (Facebook and WhatsApp) from September to December 2020; no incentives were offered for completing it. A researcher was responsible for verifying the data collected in each survey and selecting those that would be included in the study. An anonymous database was created, allowing a blind evaluation by two researchers.

Data analysis was performed using the SPSS statistical package version 25. Surveys that did not complete the requested information were excluded from the final analysis. Descriptive statistics were applied to the study variables using frequency distribution tables. Additionally, a bivariate analysis was conducted linking the variables of interest with gender, university of origin, and year of study using the chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests. To facilitate statistical analysis and understanding in the presentation of the results, the university of origin was dichotomized into universities from the Costa region and universities from the Sierra region. Similarly, study years were grouped into first and second year, third and fourth year, and fifth and sixth year. A significance level of 5% was applied.

A total of 492 completed questionnaires were obtained, of which 24 were eliminated mainly due to missing or inconsistent information. The final study sample consisted of 468 students from seven faculties of dentistry in Peru, with an average age (± standard deviation) of 21.7 (± 3.5) years. The most frequent age group was 21 to 24-year-olds (214 students, 45.7%), females (313, 66.9%), students from the National University of the Altiplano (73, 15.6%), those in their third academic year (94, 20.1%), and those not belonging to a research group (266, 56.8%) (Table 1).

Table 1:
Characteristics of Dentistry Students from seven Peruvian Universities during 2020

*More than one possible answer. Source: Own elaboration

Regarding the perception of research, the vast majority of students expressed interest (94.7%). 405 (86.5%) believed that the importance of academic publishing is to increase scientific knowledge, and 320 (68.4%) identified the lack of adequate guidance as the main limitation for research during undergraduate studies. When comparing these three variables with gender, university of origin, and year of study, only a statistically significant relationship was found between interest in research (p = 0.014) and the importance of publishing academic papers (p <0.05) with the university of origin. It was observed that interest in research and the perception of the importance of various motives for publishing were greater in universities from the Sierra region. Also, the year of study was related to the perception of the importance of research as it contributes to increasing scientific knowledge (p = 0.046), and this was perceived as more important by upper-year students (Table 2).

Table 2:
Perception of Research among Dentistry Students by gender, region of origin and year of study, 2020

* Univ. Coast: Universities from the Coast region. Univ. Sierra: Universities from the Sierra region Source: Own elaboration

The majority of students believed that their knowledge in research methodology (54.9%), scientific writing (55.8%), and information search (50.2%) was average. When relating these variables to gender, university of origin, and year of study, only a statistically significant relationship was found between the perception of knowledge in research methodology (p = 0.002) and information search (p = 0.006) with the university of origin; there was a higher positive perception among students from the Sierra region (Table 3).

Table 3:
Self-perception of research knowledge among Dentistry Students by gender, region of origin and year of study, 2020

Univ. Coast: Universities from the Coast region. Univ. Sierra: Universities from the Sierra region Source: Own elaboration

Regarding scientific production, all Dentistry students indicated they engaged in academic activities within the university setting. The most frequent activities were the preparation of monographs (414 [88.5%]), followed by reports (326 [69.6%]) and literature reviews (256 [54.7%]). Only 11 (2.4%) students published scientific articles, all of which were original, and some reported a second publication: a review article (9.1%) and a letter to the editor (9.1%). A higher production of monographs was found among students from the Sierra region (p <0.001) and a higher production of clinical reports (p <0.001) and theses (p <0.001) among fifth and sixth-year students. Additionally, more scientific article publications were found among students from universities in the Costa region (p = 0.027) and those in the fifth and sixth years of study (p = 0.003) (Table 4).

Table 4:
Scientific production of Dentistry Students by gender, region of origin and year of study, 2020

Univ. Coast: Universities from the Coast region. Univ. Sierra: Universities from the Sierra region Source: Own elaboration

This study showed that almost all students from seven faculties of dentistry in Peru are interested in scientific research and recognize its importance in contributing to knowledge. This aligns with reports from dentistry faculties in Peru and Cuba ^10,13. No significant differences were found based on gender or academic year. This information should be leveraged by the relevant authorities to promote research activities from the early years of training as well as equitable participation of both males and females to reduce gender inequality in scientific research ¹⁴. These findings differ from those of Corrales et al. ⁶, who argue that interest increases as students progress through their academic cycles and is higher in males; this contrasts with the findings of Alarco et al. ¹⁴. Furthermore, one study reported that students from public management universities have a higher interest in scientific research ¹⁵, contrasting with this study where students from the Sierra region (two of the three studied universities are private) showed greater interest in research ¹⁵.

A possible explanation for these results, regarding interest and the importance of scientific research perceived regardless of gender and academic year, is the context under which the study was conducted. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the necessity and significance of research through he generation and dissemination of knowledge on prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and control of the new disease. It also emphasized the scientific contributions of various health professions in the search for solutions ¹⁶. However, it is essential for students to recognize the benefits of their practice on personal, professional, and institutional levels ¹⁷. Students from the Costa region placed more importance on publishing academic papers than students from the Sierra region, which might be attributed to more exposure and opportunities for publishing in their academic environments.

This interest can progressively decrease as students encounter obstacles during their undergraduate training for scientific research ¹⁸. This study highlighted three challenges: lack of proper guidance, mentorship, and knowledge. This aligns with the findings of studies like that of MaytaTristán et al. ¹⁹ among medical students in eight Latin American countries ^6,10,13).

Most surveyed students perceived their research knowledge as average. This was previously reported by Castro-Rodríguez et al. ¹⁰, and similar findings were found by Brito et al. ²⁰ and Nakandari et al. ²¹ in multicentric studies among medical students in 12 Latin countries and 19 Peruvian faculties, respectively. This shows that this issue isn’t new or exclusive to Peruvian dentistry. On the other hand, students from the Sierra region had a better perception of their knowledge in research methodology and information searching, which translates into a higher production of monographs as self-reported. However, this did not translate into more scientific publications.

A potential solution to the perceived average knowledge is student scientific societies. These extracurricular learning communities aim to develop research skills in their members through methodological seminars, writing workshops, information search workshops, critical reading clubs, research project development, and participation in scientific conferences ²². This study identified that only 37.2% of respondents belong to a student research group. However, it is important to consider that in Peru, most student scientific societies in Dentistry were established in 2020 ²³. The current situation of these societies is concerning, as it was reported that out of 10, only 2 have institutional recognition, and 4 are inactive ²³. This contradicts the fundamental role of the university in promoting scientific activity ²⁴.

It is essential for professors who teach research subjects or are thesis advisors to take responsibility for promoting student scientific production, to which, ideally, they should be continuously linked ²⁵. In contrast, studies show the low publication of articles by Peruvian health career advisors ^26-29. In a Peruvian faculty, it was shown that out of 344 theses defended between 20102018, only 14 (4.06%) were published as scientific articles ¹². This might suggest deficiencies in strategies to conclude the research process. This study reports that the most common curricular academic works are monographs, reports, and literature reviews, and only 11 students (2.4%) managed to publish a scientific article. This implies that the habit of scientific production is scarcely encouraged in dentistry faculties, which is counterproductive since the mentioned activities mainly require students to search, select, and synthesize information under a teacher’s supervision.

Additionally, the preparation of theses and clinical reports was statistically more frequent in the last two years of training. Students nearing the end of their undergraduate studies might prefer to advance with their theses because Peruvian Law Nº 30220 requires them to defend them to obtain a professional degree. Likewise, clinical procedures increase as students progress in their training. It is essential for these academic works not to be perceived merely as a final grade for a subject but as an opportunity for updating literature and possibly generating and developing research ideas. It is recommended for the guiding teacher to act as a coach, motivating the student, listening and attending to them, being competent, using a clear and precise methodology, and showing commitment to training future researchers ³⁰.

On the other hand, other studies agree with the low percentage of student publication reported in this study. For example, in a faculty of dentistry in Peru, it was found that student publication was 3.5% ¹⁰. At the Latin American and Caribbean level, Peruvian student participation was low (3.3%) in scientific journals indexed in SciELO, surpassed by Brazil (50.3%), Colombia (19.7%), and Chile (15.8%) ⁹. The reality of student scientific production does not differ from the national scientific production of dentistry, which, according to the Scimago Journal and Country Rank, is ranked 51st worldwide ³¹. However, Mayta-Tovalino et al. ³², despite reporting low publication frequencies, supported significant growth in scientific production of dentistry faculties after the establishment of University Law N° 30220. This was enacted in 2014 to seek the continuous improvement of the university educational model in Peru ²⁴.

For Peruvian medical students, Torres-Huamanchuco et al. ³³ indicated that 20% managed to publish a manuscript. At the Latin American level, Sánchez-Duque et al. ³⁴ determined that 19.2% had authorship in a scientific article. However, it should be considered that the samples addressed in these studies were students enrolled in extracurricular online training courses on writing and scientific publication, which could lead to higher participation of students linked with research. Additionally, a reliable record of student publications wasn’t provided. One strength of this study was verifying this information by requesting the DOI or title of the research, which was not done in the aforementioned studies, so the frequency of scientific publications they reported might be overestimated ^10,33-34.

Students from the Costa region and those in the final years of study published more scientific articles. In the first case, this might be interpreted as larger, more established universities with more resources and research support being located in this region. In the second case, it might be due to students having a longer study trajectory and, therefore, more publication opportunities than first-year students.

Since non-probabilistic sampling was used, the identified statistical relationships cannot be extrapolated but should be assumed referentially. However, this is a preliminary approach to the evaluated problem, as information was collected from dentistry students from different regions of Peru. More research is needed, albeit with probabilistic samples, to corroborate the findings of this study.

In conclusion, the majority of students expressed interest in scientific research and recognized its importance in contributing to knowledge. The most perceived limitation for scientific research during undergraduate studies was the lack of proper guidance. Furthermore, most students rated their knowledge in research methodology, scientific writing, and information searching as average.

A relationship was only found between the perception of interest in research, the importance of publishing, and knowledge in research methodology and information searching with the university of origin. On the other hand, scientific publication by undergraduate dentistry students in Peru was low, with the most commonly published type being original articles and the most frequent academic work being monographs. Lastly, there was a relationship between scientific publication and the preparation of academic works with the university of origin and the year of study.