Perceptions, attitudes, practices, and barriers towards research in standardized training of laboratory medicine trainees: a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey

Why this story matters

Behind nearly every medical test result lies a team of specialists in laboratory medicine, yet the people training for these roles often struggle to take part in research that could improve patient care. This study from a major Chinese hospital lifts the curtain on how young lab professionals think about research, what they actually do, and what stands in their way. The findings reveal a group that is eager but under-supported—and suggest simple steps that could turn hidden potential into real scientific progress.

Who the trainees are and what the study asked

The researchers surveyed all 56 trainees in a standardized laboratory medicine program at West China Second University Hospital. These were first- and second-year trainees learning to run and interpret the tests that guide diagnosis and treatment. Using an anonymous online questionnaire, the team asked about attitudes toward research, hands-on experience, obstacles, and what kinds of training the trainees wanted. The questions covered everything from whether research feels interesting or useful, to which parts of a project they had tried, to how they preferred to learn new skills.

Strong belief in research, but fading enthusiasm

Almost every trainee agreed that research matters. They felt it sharpens thinking, improves professional ability, helps solve clinical problems, and boosts job prospects. Yet when the answers were split by training year, a telling pattern emerged. First-year trainees were more enthusiastic on nearly every measure. They were more likely to say that research is an important part of their profession, that it improves their thinking, and that it helps with real clinical questions. By the second year, agreement scores on these points had dropped noticeably. This suggests that early idealism can give way to frustration once trainees encounter the realities of doing research without enough support.

Plenty of basic tasks, almost no full projects

When the team looked at what trainees had actually done, they found that most had helped with simple parts of research. Many reported collecting data from records or instruments, searching the scientific literature, or helping with basic statistical work. Some had attended academic meetings. But involvement rarely went deeper. No trainee had yet published a scientific paper or even been listed as a co-author. Their experience resembled helping hands in someone else’s project, rather than leading or fully understanding a study from start to finish. Not surprisingly, when asked what kind of project they would most like to try, trainees gravitated toward case reports and straightforward retrospective studies—designs that feel concrete and manageable.

What gets in the way and what trainees say they need

The survey highlighted a small set of obstacles that almost everyone recognized. The most common barrier, reported by more than four out of five trainees in both years, was a simple one: lack of training. Close behind were lack of guidance from a mentor and not knowing how to begin a project at all. Time pressure and limited resources also appeared, but they were less dominant than the shortage of teaching and supervision. At the same time, demand for help was strikingly high. At least three-quarters of trainees wanted introductory courses on medical research, training in how to search and judge the literature, help with academic writing, and one-on-one guidance. Above all, they preferred to learn by joining a mentor’s real research project rather than only attending lectures.

What the findings mean for the future of lab medicine

For a lay reader, the message is straightforward: future laboratory experts see research as important and want to contribute, but they are mostly stuck at the starting line. Without structured teaching and hands-on mentoring, their enthusiasm fades and their contributions stay limited to routine tasks. The authors argue that residency-style training programs should build in basic research courses and clear mentorship structures, giving trainees a guided path from curiosity to completed projects. If such support is put in place, today’s lab trainees could become tomorrow’s innovators, turning everyday testing experience into discoveries that benefit patients.

Citation: Gao, ZX., Yan, L., Zhang, M. et al. Perceptions, attitudes, practices, and barriers towards research in standardized training of laboratory medicine trainees: a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey. Sci Rep 16, 11636 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42037-6

Keywords: laboratory medicine training, medical education research, resident research barriers, research mentorship, clinical trainees