ArticleJournal of microbiology & biology education2018
Annotated Primary Literature: A Professional Development Opportunity in Science Communication for Graduate Students and Postdocs.
Article in Journal of microbiology & biology education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Happens When Undergraduate Biology Students Meet with Professional Scientists to Discuss Research? An Exploratory Investigation into Scientific Discourse, Motivation, and Sense of Belonging.CBE life sciences education · 2025Article
- Developing Scientific Communication Skills Using Primary Literature in an Undergraduate Cell Biology Course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Annotations Serve as an On Ramp for Introductory Biology Students Learning to Read Primary Scientific Literature.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Discussion of Annotated Research Articles Results in Increases in Scientific Literacy within a Cell Biology Course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Primary Scientific Literature Is Not Just for Students and Academics: a Study of Primary Source Modalities and Predictors of Learning across Adulthood.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- The Five Core Concepts of Biology as a Framework for Promoting Expert-Like Behaviors in Undergraduates Learning How to Read Primary Scientific Literature.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2022Article
- From Novice To Expert: An Assessment To Measure Strategies Students Implement While Learning To Read Primary Scientific Literature.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2022Article
- A Modified CREATE Intervention Improves Student Cognitive and Affective Outcomes in an Upper-Division Genetics Course.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2020Article
- Expert-Novice Comparison Reveals Pedagogical Implications for Students' Analysis of Primary Literature.CBE life sciences education · 2019Article
- Annotated primary scientific literature: A pedagogical tool for undergraduate courses.PLoS biology · 2019Article
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
Formal training in communicating science to a general audience is not traditionally included in graduate and postdoctoral-level training programs. However, the ability to effectively communicate science is increasingly recognized as a responsibility of professional scientists. We describe a science communication professional development opportunity in which scientists at the graduate-level and above annotate primary scientific literature, effectively translating complex research into an accessible educational tool for undergraduate students. We examined different types of annotator training, each with its own populations and evaluation methods, and surveyed participants about why they participated, the confidence they have in their self-reported science communication skills, and how they plan to leverage this experience to advance their science careers. Additionally, to confirm that annotators were successful in their goal of making the original research article easier to read, we performed a readability analysis on written annotations and compared that with the original text of the published paper. We found that both types of annotator training led to a gain in participants' self-reported confidence in their science communication skills. Also, the annotations were significantly more readable than the original paper, indicating that the training was effective. The results of this work highlight the potential of annotator training to serve as a value-added component of scientific training at and above the graduate level.
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.