ArticleLa Tunisie medicale2023
A qualitative study about critical appraisal of medical literature learning among medical students.
Article in La Tunisie medicale, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSkills in critical appraisal of medical literature are compulsory to achieve in medical practice. This step is the third step of the evidence-based medicine process whose main role is to bridge a gap between scientific evidence and practice. Acquiring skills in critical appraisal of the literature has been reported to be challenging for the trainees with different limits according to their levels, backgrounds or specialties.
aimTo assess the limits and factors influencing the practice of appraising literature of different students from the same faculty. This faculty included training of biostatistics and preventive medicine in the curriculum during the first 2 years of medical education without linking this learning to the evidence-based medicine practice.
methodsThe authors performed a qualitative study including volunteers who attended voluntarily the same training about critical appraisal of medical literature. The study was based on a satisfaction questionnaire fulfilled by all the participants at the end of the training and on an individual semi-structured interviews programmed 3 months after the training. The satisfaction questionnaire was rated by the authors. The authors proceeded also to a content analysis of the interviews following 3 steps: pre-analysis, treatment of the results, and interpretation.
resultsAll the participants (95) fulfilled the questionnaire. The satisfaction's mean score revealed a general moderate satisfaction. Eleven students agreed to be interviewed: Five students from the third year of medical education, 2 students from the second year of medical education, 2 postgraduate students and 2 family doctors. The main themes discussed by the interviewees consisted of training organization, the assessment, the impact on research and the impact on the care process.
conclusionTo promote EBM learning, medical students first need to actively participate to interactive learning, introduced early and gradually into the curriculum and integrating all specialties including postgraduate students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38468586PMC11261492What 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.