Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37978372›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Virtual student-led neuroscience conferencing: a UK multicentre prospective study investigating delegate outcomes and delivery mode.

Emily R Bligh, Yousif Aldabbagh, Jack Sheppard, Barbora Krivankova, Jay J Park, Joe Cheung, Gergo Erdi-Krausz, Joshua Thomas, Hibatallah Altaher, Ellie Courtney and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Emily R BlighDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK. emily_bligh@hotmail.co.uk.
Yousif Aldabbagh *UCL Medical School, University College London, London, WC1E 6DE, UK.
Jack Sheppard *UCL Medical School, University College London, London, WC1E 6DE, UK.
Barbora KrivankovaDepartment of Surgery, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.
Jay J ParkEdinburgh Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK.
Joe CheungQueen Mary University of London, Barts and The London School of Medicine London, London, UK.
Gergo Erdi-KrauszFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJF, UK.
Joshua ThomasFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK.
Hibatallah AltaherFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK.
Ellie CourtneyFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK.
Tom FarrowFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry & Health, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical neuroscience training programmes are becoming increasingly competitive to enter. UK university neuroscience societies act as a local environment for students to develop their career interests and provide portfolio building opportunities through hosting events such as annual conferences. Recently there has been a transition to more of these events being held online yet the impact of this, if any, remains unclear. This prospective study aimed to identify the impact of student-led neuroscience conferences on delegates and examine attitudes towards an online delivery approach.

methodsMulti-centre prospective survey study using pre-conference, post-conference, and 6-month post-conference online questionnaires distributed at 6 virtual student-led neuroscience conferences in 2021. The questionnaires had five-domains: demographics, career aspirations, academic skillsets, an educational manipulation check (EMC) and mode of delivery preference.

resultsNine hundred twenty-four surveys were completed across 559 conference attendances. 79.9% of delegates were medical students. Interest in a neuroscience career (p < 0.001), preparedness to undertake research (p < 0.001) and presentation (p < 0.001), as well as EMC scores (p < 0.001) increased immediately post conference. Most participants at 6 months post-attendance had completed an academic project (71.9%) or presentation (50.9%), although 88.8% were lost to follow up. Online format was preferred (65%) with reasons including elimination of travel and access to home facilities whilst lack of face-to-face interaction and engagement were recognised limitations.

conclusionUK student-led online neuroscience conferences play a role in developing knowledge and may facilitate career interest, academic skillset and longer term portfolio building. A hybrid virtual and in-person experience would offer an ideal solution to future conferencing, providing options promoting engagement and interactivity whilst advocating sustainability, accessibility and widening participation.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalAttitudeHumansProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomConferenceEducationNeurologyNeurosciencesNeurosurgeryVirtual

Identifiers

PMID37978372
PMCPMC10657021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.