ArticleJournal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience2016
A Model For Teaching Advanced Neuroscience Methods: A Student-Run Seminar to Increase Practical Understanding and Confidence.
Article in Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment ofJournal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Using Blogs as Practice Writing About Original Neuroscience Papers Enhances Students' Confidence in Their Critical Analysis of Research.Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neuroscience doctoral students must master specific laboratory techniques and approaches to complete their thesis work (hands-on learning). Due to the highly interdisciplinary nature of the field, learning about a diverse range of methodologies through literature surveys and coursework is also necessary for student success (hands-off learning). Traditional neuroscience coursework stresses what is known about the nervous system with relatively little emphasis on the details of the methods used to obtain this knowledge. Furthermore, hands-off learning is made difficult by a lack of detail in methods sections of primary articles, subfield-specific jargon and vague experimental rationales. We designed a student-taught course to enable first-year neuroscience doctoral students to overcome difficulties in hands-off learning by introducing a new approach to reading and presenting primary research articles that focuses on methodology. In our literature-based course students were encouraged to present a method with which they had no previous experience. To facilitate weekly discussions, "experts" were invited to class sessions. Experts were advanced graduate students who had hands-on experience with the method being covered and served as discussion co-leaders. Self-evaluation worksheets were administered on the first and last days of the 10-week course and used to assess students' confidence in discussing research and methods outside of their primary research expertise. These evaluations revealed that the course significantly increased the students' confidence in reading, presenting and discussing a wide range of advanced neuroscience methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27980464PMC5105964What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.