ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
An Innovative Journal Club Approach to Enhance the Scientific Skills of Medical Students: A Pilot Evaluation Study.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Future of Health Professions Education.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To deliver evidence-based care, medical professionals must be able to critically appraise scientific literature, a skill often underemphasized in traditional medical education. Methods: Supported by the teaching commission of the Medical Faculty of Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, a novel didactic approach was developed, integrating elements of a Journal Club (JC) with e-learning modules, supervised by a mentor. This approach aims to deepen and apply scientific skills acquired in earlier stages of medical education. Final-year medical students independently select, critically evaluate, and present a scientific paper in a JC that is related to a specific patient. Simultaneously, they are required to complete six online modules (including an orientation module) covering the topics evidence-based clinical practice, literature search, Critical Appraisal Skills Program, basic statistical analysis, and effective presentation skills. Results: In the pilot phase, 25 students and five mentors participated, with 20 students and four mentors completing the evaluation. Students rated the teaching project as relevant (mean 2.4, scale 1 - 4) but expressed mixed views on its suitability for final year (mean 2.5). Self-assessment scores improved across all five learning outcomes, with notable increases in students' confidence to evaluate clinical relevance and study strengths/weaknesses. Digital modules were rated as comprehensible (scores 1.5 - 2.0) and useful for JC preparation (scores 2.1 - 2.6). The overall teaching project received a mean rating of 2.8 (scale 1 - 6), with 58% (n = 19) of students recommending the course. Mentors unanimously rated the project as highly beneficial (100% recommendation rate). Conclusion: The evaluation of the pilot phase indicates that this teaching project has the potential to significantly enhance students' ability to critically engage with scientific literature. Ongoing refinement based on feedback and planned implementation across all departments aim to promote sustainable scientific literacy in clinical training.
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.