ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2017
Involving junior doctors in medical article publishing: is it an effective method of teaching?
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceptions of research experience during internal medicine training: insights from a national survey.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Developing a Beginner's Guide to Writing a Clinical Case Report: A Pilot Evaluation by Junior Doctors.Cureus · 2019Article
- A Medical Article Publishing Club for Junior Doctors: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.Cureus · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHaving peer-reviewed articles published in medical journals is important for career progression in many medical specialties. Despite this, only a minority of junior doctors have the skills in the area of medical article publishing. The aim of this study was to assess junior doctors' views concerning being involved in medical article publishing and whether they perceive involvement as an effective method of teaching.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was administered to a convenience sample of doctors who had been involved in medical article publishing. Questions concerned training and involvement in publishing as junior doctors, effects on education and training, is it an effective method of teaching and should publishing be part of their education and training program. Questions used the 5-point Likert scale. Of the 39 doctors, 37 (94.9%) doctors responded.
resultsOnly one-third of respondents agreed that they had adequate training or involvement in medical article publishing during their undergraduate medical training. Many (78.4%) agreed that it was difficult to get published as a junior doctor. Publishing as a junior doctor improved knowledge about publishing, understanding of the topic and interest in the field of study for 92, 92 and 73% of respondents, respectively. Many (89%) agreed that publishing made them eager to publish more. Most (76%) agreed that it was likely to encourage interest in a postgraduate career in that field of study. A majority (92%) felt that involvement in medical article publishing is an effective method of teaching and it should be a part of the junior doctors' education and training program.
conclusionJunior doctors feel that involvement in medical article publishing contributes to learning and education and is an effective method of teaching. This supports the need to incorporate such training into the junior doctors' education and training program.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.