Student-Led Research as a Catalyst for Curriculum Relevance in an Applied Infectious Disease Course

Abstract

Track: Learning Professionals as Researchers

Introduction:
The influenza vaccination status of healthcare workers (HCWs) can influence HCW infection risks, absenteeism, rates of healthcare-associated infections, patient healthcare costs, and institutional effectiveness. While extensive research has explored vaccine knowledge and attitudes among professional nurses, limited attention has been given to pre-nursing students—an essential group poised to address future healthcare challenges. Faculty from Schools of Health Sciences and Nursing collaborated with traditional undergraduate research (UR) students to design and implement an evidence-based course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) to engage pre-nursing students in meaningful, real-time research. By integrating vaccination relevance, the etiology of viruses, and flu into the curriculum, the study demonstrates how applied infectious disease education can prepare students for professional practice while addressing critical gaps in knowledge and beliefs.

Methods:
Faculty investigators and UR students collected data via anonymous surveys and confidential interviews to assess baseline knowledge and beliefs among 5 working nurses (Fall 2023), 38 nursing students (Spring 2022), and 89 pre-nursing students enrolled in an applied infectious diseases course (Spring 2023/Fall 2023/Spring 2024). Evidence from working nurses and nursing students informed the development of a CURE curriculum designed to improve pre-nursing students’ understanding of influenza disease, vaccination, and their implications for HCWs. Chi-square tests analyzed differences in pre/post-curriculum knowledge and beliefs, with a focus on contrasting outcomes between historically-high (HHV) and historically-low influenza vaccinators (LHV).

Results:
Among working nurses, interviews revealed gaps in knowledge regarding vaccine safety, efficacy, and the role of HCW vaccine status in patient outcomes, as well as resistance to employer vaccine mandates. Nursing students also displayed limited understanding of vaccine safety and the risks HCW vaccination poses to both their own health and patient outcomes. Pre-nursing students exhibited similar deficiencies, with LHV students demonstrating lower baseline knowledge and less support for HCWs' personal responsibility to vaccinate. After participating in the CURE curriculum, pre-nursing students showed significant knowledge improvements in areas such as vaccine safety, efficacy, and patient risks. However, changes in vaccine-related beliefs were less pronounced, indicating the complexity of influencing personal perspectives.

Discussion:
This study highlights the importance of using research and evidence-based practices to design a curriculum bridging the gap between foundational etiology knowledge and real-world clinical challenges. Incorporating real-time research and relevant practice topics, such as the etiology of viruses and the importance of vaccinations, increases engagement by directly tying course content to students’ future professional responsibilities. Collaboration between faculty in the Schools of Health Sciences and Nursing ensured a focus on career-relevant outcomes, and UR students played a key role in data collection and analysis. The CURE curriculum not only improved pre-nursing students’ knowledge but also attracted participants to engage in future research projects, fostering a pipeline of research-oriented healthcare professionals.

Differences identified between HHV and LHV student groups provided insights for refining future curricula, emphasizing the need for tailored educational strategies to address both knowledge and belief disparities. This framework, combining interdisciplinary research, CURE activities, and evidence-based practice, can serve as a model for enhancing curriculum relevance and student engagement across diverse academic disciplines.