Trial reportBMC medical education2018
The effectiveness and feasibility of TREAT (Tailoring Research Evidence and Theory) journal clubs in allied health: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Active learning through journal clubs in pharmacy education: assessment of student experiences, outcomes, and attitudes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Implementation of a Resident-Led Subspecialty Journal Club: The Impacts of Peer-Led Learning.Turkish archives of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Clinical nurses' perceived educational value of nursing journal clubs.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- What do clinicians perceive as the effective implementation strategies for TREAT journal clubs? A qualitative study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Using a journal club to navigate a maze of COVID-19 papers in a front-line hospital service.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Research training incorporating education and mentoring for rural and regional allied health professionals: An evaluation study.The Australian journal of rural health · 2022Article
- Research education and training for nurses and allied health professionals: a systematic scoping review.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Long term tailored implementation of structured "TREAT" journal clubs in allied health: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- The impact of a small-group educational intervention for allied health professionals to enhance evidence-based practice: mixed methods evaluation.BMC medical education · 2019Article
- Factors that influence the sustainability of structured allied health journal clubs: a qualitative study.BMC medical education · 2019Article
- Journal Clubs Beyond Classrooms: Their Potential Role in Continuous Professional Development Using Online Technologies and Social Media.Indian dermatology online journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundJournal clubs (JC) may increase clinicians' evidence-based practice (EBP) skills and facilitate evidence uptake in clinical practice, however there is a lack of research into their effectiveness in allied health. We investigated the effectiveness of a structured JC that is Tailored According to Research Evidence And Theory (TREAT) in improving EBP skills and practice compared to a standard JC format for allied health professionals. Concurrently, we explored the feasibility of implementing TREAT JCs in a healthcare setting, by evaluating participating clinicians' perceptions and satisfaction.
methodsWe conducted an explanatory mixed methods study involving a cluster randomised controlled trial with a nested focus group for the intervention participants. Nine JCs with 126 allied health participants were randomly allocated to receive either the TREAT or standard JC format for 1 h/month for 6 months. We conducted pre-post measures of EBP skills and attitudes using the EBP questionnaire and Assessing Competence in Evidence-Based Medicine tool and a tailored satisfaction and practice change questionnaire. Post-intervention, we also conducted a focus group with TREAT participants to explore their perceptions of the format.
resultsThere were no significant differences between JC formats in EBP skills, knowledge or attitudes or influence on clinical practice, with participants maintaining intermediate level skills across time points. Participants reported significantly greater satisfaction with the organisation of the TREAT format. Participants in both groups reported positive changes to clinical practice. Perceived outcomes to the TREAT format and facilitating mechanisms were identified including the use of an academic facilitator, group appraisal approach and consistent appraisal tools which assisted skill development and engagement.
conclusionsIt is feasible to implement an evidence-based JC for allied health clinicians. While clinicians were more satisfied with the TREAT format, it did not significantly improve their EBP skills, attitudes, knowledge and/or practice, when compared to the standard format. The use of an academic facilitator, group based critical appraisal, and the consistent use of appraisal tools were perceived as useful components of the JC format. A structured JC may maintain EBP skills in allied health clinicians and facilitate engagement, however additional training may be required to further enhance EBP skills.
trial registrationACTRN12616000811404 Retrospectively registered 21 June 2016.
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.