Medical Education Research Priorities for Master’s Students in Sudan: A Qualitative Study


Background: Believing research prioritization can increase the research value and augment advances in the scientific base of any profession, this study aimed to identify research priorities relevant for medical education in Sudan.

Methods: The study was designed to capture a qualitative exploration of multiple stakeholders’ opinions. Data were collected from two stakeholder groups: experts and students of medical education in Sudan. Semi-structured individual interviews and focus groups from 10 experts and 41 learners were incorporated. The categories and subcategories, derived from experts’ data inductively through constant comparison, enhanced the development of a coding framework. This framework was used deductively to analyze the beliefs and opinions of the learners leading to a list that exemplifies priorities for medical education research.

Results: A set of seven principal and three minor themes were identified, the principal themes were: Curriculum Content, Design, and Delivery; Faculty Development; Assessment Methods; Research; Accreditation, Evaluation, and Quality; Professionalism; and Student Selection and Support. Four themes were identified to justify participants’ selections: Quality education and patient care; Accreditation of schools; Curricula contextualization; and Documentation of success stories.

Conclusion: This instrumental research fulfilled its aim to mount a set of medical education research priorities grounded in collected perceptions with optimal stakeholder engagement. Importantly, there were many more similarities than differences between these findings and those from other countries which suggests that some topics are relevant across the international arena and one may propose the commencements of an international medical education agenda.


medical education, master students, research priorities, priority setting, Sudan

[1] Fahal, A. H. (2007). Medical education in the Sudan: its strengths and weaknesses. Medical Teacher, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 910–914.

[2] World Health Organization. (2015). Review of medical education in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. WHO.

[3] Obeidat, A. S., Alhaqwi, A. I., and Abdulghani, H. M. (2015). Reprioritizing current research trends in medical education: a reflection on research activities in Saudi Arabia. Medical Teacher, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. S5–S8.

[4] Karrar, Z. (2018). Personal communication.

[5] Sudan Medical Council. (2006). Accredutation of medical schools. Sudan Medical Council.

[6] Karle, H. (2006). Global Standards and accreditation in medical education: A view from the WFME. Academic Medicine, vol. 81, no. 12, pp. S43–S48.

[7] World Federation for Medical Education. (2018). Sudan medical council awarded wfme recognition status [Press Release]. World Federation for Medical Education.

[8] Greysen, S. R., Dovlo, D., Olapade-Olaopa, E. O., et al. (2011). Medical education in sub-Saharan Africa: a literature review. Medical Education, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 973–986.

[9] Lam, T. P. and Lam, Y. Y. B. (2009). Medical education reform – The Asian experience. Academic Medicine, vol. 84, no. 9, pp. 1313–1317.

[10] Tootoonchi, M., Yamani, N., Changiz, T., et al. (2012). Research priorities in medical education: A national study. Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 83–91.

[11] Boney, O., Bell, M., Bell, N., et al. (2015). Identifying research priorities in anaesthesia and perioperative care: final report of the joint National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia/James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership. British Medical Journal Open, vol. 5, no. 12, p. e010006.

[12] Chalmers, I. and Glasziou, P. (2009). Avoidable waste in the production and reporting ofresearch evidence. Lancet, vol. 374, no. 9683, pp. 86–89.

[13] Ajjawi, R., Barton, K. L., Dennis, A. A., et al. (2017). Developing a national dental education research strategy: priorities, barriers and enablers. British Medical Journal Open, vol. 7, no. 3, p. e013129.

[14] Dennis, A. A., Cleland, J. A., Johnston, P., et al. (2014). Exploring stakeholders' views of medical education research priorities: a national survey. Medical Education, vol. 48, no. 11, pp. 1078–1091.

[15] Nabeie, P., Amini, M., Ghanavati, S., et al. (2016). Research priorities in medical education at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences: Categories and subcategories in the Iranian context. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 26–32.

[16] Ball, L., Barnes, K., Laur, C., et al. (2016). Setting priorities for research in medical nutrition education: an international approach. BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 12, p. e013241.

[17] Amini, M., Kojuri, J., Lotfi, F., et al. (2012). Research priorities in medical education in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 687–692.

[18] Wilkinson, T. J., Weller, J. M., McKimm, J., et al. (2010). Programmatic research in New Zealand medical education: A national collaboration. New Zealand Medical Journal, vol. 123, no. 1318, pp. 24–33.

[19] Hodges, B. D., Albert, M., Arweiler, D., et al. (2011). The future of medical education: A Canadian environmental scan. Medical Education, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 95–106.

[20] Rees, C. E. and Monrouxe, L. V. (2010). Theory in medical education research: How do we get there? Medical Education, vol. 44, vol. 4, pp. 334–339.

[21] Stalmeijer, R. E., McNaughton, N., and Van Mook, W. N. K. A. (2014). Using focus groups in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 91. Medical Teacher, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 923–939.

[22] Watling, C. J. and Lingard, L. (2012). Grounded theory in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 70. Medical Teacher, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 850–861.

[23] Tavakol, M. and Sandars, J. (2014). Quantitative and qualitative methods in medical education research: AMEE Guide No 90: Part I. Medical Teacher, vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 746–756.

[24] Cleland, J. (2015). Exploring versus measuring considering the fundamental differences between qualitative and quantitative research. In J. A. Cleland and S. J. Durning (Eds.), Researching medical education. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

[25] Bowen, G. A. (2005). Preparing a qualitative research-based dissertation: Lessons learned. The Qualitative Report, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 208–222.

[26] Harvey, N. and Holmes, C. A. (2012). Nominal group technique: An effective method for obtaining group consensus. International Journal of Nursing Practice, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 188–194.

[27] Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2018). Validity and reliability. In L. Cohen, L. Manion, and K. Morrison (Eds.), Research methods in education (8th ed). London and New York: Routledge.

[28] Ng, S., Lingard, L., and Kennedy, T. J. (2014). Qualitative research in medical education Methodologies and methods. In T. Swanwick (Ed.), Understanding medical education: Evidence, theory, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 371–384). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

[29] Albert, M., Hodges, B., and Regehr, G. (2007). Research in medical education: Balancing service and science. Advances in Health Sciences Education, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 103–115.

[30] O’Reilly, M. and Parker, N. (2012). ‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: A critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 190–197.

[31] Starks, H. and Brown Trinidad, S. (2007). Choose your method: A Comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis and grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 1372–1380.

[32] Cote, L. and Turgeon, J. (2005). Appraising qualitative research articles in medicine and medical education. Medical Teacher, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 71–75.

[33] Qualitative data. (2014). In M. Denscombe (Ed.), The good research guide for small-scale research projects – Open up study skills (5th ed., pp. 250–273). Maidenhead, Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education.

[34] Donovan, J. and Sanders, C. (2005). Key issues in the analysis of qualitative data in health services research. In A. Bowling and S. Ebrahim (Eds.), Handbook of health research methods: Investigation, measurement and analysis (pp. 515–553). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

[35] Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman and R. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing qualitative data (pp. 173–194). Routledge.

[36] Robson, C. (2002). The analysis of qualitative data. In C. Robson (Ed.). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers (2nd ed., pp. 455–499). Blackwell.

[37] Pope, C., Ziebland, S., and Mays, N. (2000). Qualitative research in health care: Analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal, vol. 320, no. 7227, pp. 114–116.

[38] WNO. (2016). Education Development and Research Centre (EDC -Gezira). In UoG Fom. Sudan Currncy Printing Press.

[39] Grant, J. (2002). Learning needs assessment: assessing the needs. British Medical Journal, vol. 324, pp. 156–159.

[40] Palermo, C., King, O., Brock, T., et al. (2019). Setting priorities for health education research A mixed methods study. Medical Teacher, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 1029–1038.

[41] Van Schalkwyk, S. C., Kiguli-Malwadde, E., Budak, J. Z., et al. (2020). Identifying research priorities for health professions education research in sub-Saharan Africa using a modified Delphi method. BMC Medical Education, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 443.

[42] Norcini, J. (2014). Workplace assessment. In: T. Swanwick (Ed.), Understanding medical education: Evidence, theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 279–292). ASME, Welly Blackwell Publishing.

[43] Norcini, J. and Burch, V. (2007). Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31. Medical Teacher, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 855–871.

[44] Dubrowski, A. and Morin, M.-P. (2011). Evaluating pain education programs: An integrated approach. Pain Research and Management, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 407–410.

[45] Chandratilake, M., McAleer, S., and Gibson, J. (2012). Cultural similarities and differences in medical professionalism: A multi-region study. Medical Education, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 257–266.

[46] Monrouxe, L. V. (2010). Identity, identification and medical education: Why should we care? Medical Education, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 40–49.

[47] Wilkinson, T. J. and Wade, W. B. (2009). A blueprint to assess professionalism: Results of a systematic review. Academic Medicine, vol. 84, pp. 551–558.

[48] McGaghie, W. C., Issenberg, S. B., Cohen, E. R., et al. (2011). Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, vol. 86, no. 6, pp. 706–711.

[49] McGaghie, W. C., Issenberg, S. B., Petrusa, E. R., et al. (2006). Effect of practice on standardised learning outcomes in simulation-based medical education. Medical Education, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 792–797.

[50] Cook, D. A., Hatala, R., and Brydges, R. (2011). Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education. JAMA, vol. 306, no. 9, pp. 2011–1234.

[51] Kaufman, D. M. (2003). ABC of learning and teaching in medicine. Applying educational theory in practice. BMJ, vol. 326, pp. 213–216.

[52] Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011). Teaching according to how student learn teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does? (4th ed). McGraw-Hill Education.

[53] Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M., Dolmans, D. H. J. M., and Scherpbier, A. J. J. A. (2000). The need for evidence in education. Medical Teacher, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 246–250.

[54] O'Brien, J. M. (2015). Conceptualizing the research culture in postgraduate medical education: Implications for leading culture change. Journal of Medical Humanities, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 291–307.

[55] Maxwell, J. A. (2010). Using numbers in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 16, no. 6.

[56] Illing, J. (2014). Thinking about research: Theoretical perspectives, ethics and scholarship. In Understanding medical education [Internet] (2nd ed., pp. 331–348). Wiley-Blackwell.

[57] Rees, C. E., Francis, B., and Pollard, A. (2015). The state of medical education research: What can we learn from the outcomes of the UK Research Excellence Framework? Medical Education, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 446–448.

[58] World Federation for Medical Education and the Foundation for Advancement of International Medical Education and Research. (2016). World Directory of Medical Schools [Internet]. Available from: