ArticleBMC medical education2025
Developing future health professions educators' research literacy through pedagogical journal clubs: facts and figures from five years of experience.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFuture health professions educators need to develop educational research literacy to elevate the evidence base of their educational work, and to participate confidently and substantively in academic discourse on Health Professions Education (HPE). Pedagogical Journal Clubs (JCs) could be one means to this goal, but there is little empirical evidence to support this. To address this gap, we used pedagogical JCs in a master's program in HPE and analysed the experience gained.
methodsWe conducted a self-evaluation study based on five cross-sectional online surveys from 2020 to 2024 to gather data on students' experiences (n = 94) with this specific learning format. The self-developed questionnaire collected data on the respondent's demographics, previous experiences with JCs, perceived effects of pedagogical JCs, and their potential future application. The cumulated quantitative data from these surveys was analysed descriptively, answers to a final open-ended question were clustered thematically.
resultsThe respondents assessed the active and critical engagement with educational research literature in the pedagogical JCs as a valuable contribution to their scientific qualification. 95% were convinced that pedagogical JCs are suitable for promoting the evidence base of their educational work. However, the master's students were rather hesitant when asked whether they would be willing to organise and use pedagogical JCs to bridge the gap between research and practice at their future workplace. They saw numerous obstacles to such implementation in practice.
conclusionPedagogical JCs are a promising learning format to develop the ability to access, appraise and apply educational research results. However, further research is essential to establish a stronger evidence-based connection between pedagogical JCs and this educational research literacy. In addition, structural support is needed in institutions relevant to HPE, but so is a change in mindset among educators in order to transfer the experience gained with pedagogical JCs into later educational practice.
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.