ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2024
Evaluating a research methodology workshop among postgraduate students using Kirkpatrick's model.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2024. 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
backgroundIn this era of evidence-based medicine, only systematic research can help in providing judicious and precise healthcare to individual patients based on updated knowledge and skills. However, many medical professionals do not feel competent and confident enough to conduct research. One of the reasons could be the lack of a research-based curriculum in undergraduate courses. The National Medical Council has also stressed the need for formal training in research methodology for healthcare professionals. The research methodology workshops help to familiarize the participants with basic, clinical, and translational research required to impart optimum patient care. The objective of our study was to evaluate a research methodology workshop conducted for postgraduate students by assessing the participant's knowledge, feedback, and expected impact using Kirkpatrick's evaluation model. MATERIALS AND
methodsA quasi-experimental, single-group study was conducted among 132 first-year postgraduate students. The four levels of Kirkpatrick's model were applied for evaluation. Feedback forms, scores of the pretest and posttest, quality of the research proposal drafted by the postgraduates for their thesis, and finally successful submission of the research proposal were the components used to evaluate the four levels of outcome of Kirkpatrick's model. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data collected were compiled and tabulated into MS Excel. Proportions were calculated for categorical variables and mean and standard deviation (SD) for scores. A comparison of means between pre- and postworkshop scores was made with paired
resultsOut of 132 participants, 29% (38) were males and 71% (94) were females. The mean ± SD pretest and posttest scores at a 95% confidence interval were 10.55 ± 2.537 and 12.43 ± 2.484, respectively. The difference was found to be statistically significant by paired sample
conclusionParticipant feedback is vital for improving research methodology workshops. The workshop met the overall requirements of the participants. There was a significant improvement in the knowledge of participants after the workshop completion.
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.