Dataset Information

Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine the effects of training on the quality of peer review.

Design

Single blind randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups receiving different types of training plus a control group.

Setting and participants

Reviewers at a general medical journal. Interventions Attendance at a training workshop or reception of a self taught training package focusing on what editors want from reviewers and how to critically appraise randomised controlled trials.

Main outcome measures

Quality of reviews of three manuscripts sent to reviewers at four to six monthly intervals, evaluated using the validated review quality instrument; number of deliberate major errors identified; time taken to review the manuscripts; proportion recommending rejection of the manuscripts.

Results

Reviewers in the self taught group scored higher in review quality after training than did the control group (score 2.85 v 2.56; difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.44; P = 0.001), but the difference was not of editorial significance and was not maintained in the long term. Both intervention groups identified significantly more major errors after training than did the control group (3.14 and 2.96 v 2.13; P < 0.001), and this remained significant after the reviewers' performance at baseline assessment was taken into account. The evidence for benefit of training was no longer apparent on further testing six months after the interventions. Training had no impact on the time taken to review the papers but was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending rejection (92% and 84% v 76%; P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Short training packages have only a slight impact on the quality of peer review. The value of longer interventions needs to be assessed.

SUBMITTER: Schroter S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC381220 | biostudies-literature | 2004 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial.

Schroter Sara S Black Nick N Evans Stephen S Carpenter James J Godlee Fiona F Smith Richard R

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20040302 7441

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine the effects of training on the quality of peer review.<h4>Design</h4>Single blind randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups receiving different types of training plus a control group.<h4>Setting and participants</h4>Reviewers at a general medical journal. Interventions Attendance at a training workshop or reception of a self taught training package focusing on what editors want from reviewers and how to critically appraise randomised controlled trial ...[more]

PMID: 14996698

Similar Datasets

Project description:To investigate whether a dose-response relationship existed between exercise and subjective sleep quality in postmenopausal women. This objective represents a post hoc assessment that was not previously considered.Parallel-group randomised controlled trial.Clinical exercise physiology laboratory in Dallas, Texas.437 sedentary overweight/obese postmenopausal women.Participants were randomised to one of four treatments, each of 6 months of duration: a non-exercise control treatment (n=92) or one of three dosages of moderate-intensity exercise (50% of VO(2peak)), designed to meet 50% (n=151), 100% (n=99) or 150% (n=95) of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Panel physical activity recommendations. Exercise dosages were structured to elicit energy expenditures of 4, 8 or 12 kilocalories per kilogram of body weight per week (KKW), respectively. Analyses were intent to treat.Continuous scores and odds of having significant sleep disturbance, as assessed by the Sleep Problems Index from the 6-item Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale. Outcome assessors were blinded to participant randomisation assignment.Change in the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Problems Index score at 6 months significantly differed by treatment group (control: -2.09 (95% CI -4.58 to 0.40), 4 KKW: -3.93 (-5.87 to -1.99), 8 KKW: -4.06 (-6.45 to -1.67), 12 KKW: -6.22 (-8.68 to -3.77); p=0.04), with a significant dose-response trend observed (p=0.02). Exercise training participants had lower odds of having significant sleep disturbance at postintervention compared with control (4 KKW: OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.73), 8 KKW: 0.36 (0.17 to 0.77), 12 KKW: 0.34 (0.16 to 0.72)). The magnitude of weight loss did not differ between treatment conditions. Improvements in sleep quality were not related to changes in body weight, resting parasympathetic control or cardiorespiratory fitness.Exercise training induced significant improvement in subjective sleep quality in postmenopausal women, with even a low dose of exercise resulting in greatly reduced odds of having significant sleep disturbance.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00011193.

Project description:BackgroundAdvanced resuscitation skills training is an important and enjoyable part of medical training, but requires small group instruction to ensure active participation of all students. Increases in student numbers have made this increasingly difficult to achieve.MethodsA single-blind randomised controlled trial of peer-led vs. expert-led resuscitation training was performed using a group of sixth-year medical students as peer instructors. The expert instructors were a senior and a middle grade doctor, and a nurse who is an Advanced Life Support (ALS) Instructor.A power calculation showed that the trial would have a greater than 90% chance of rejecting the null hypothesis (that expert-led groups performed 20% better than peer-led groups) if that were the true situation. Secondary outcome measures were the proportion of High Pass grades in each groups and safety incidents.The peer instructors designed and delivered their own course material. To ensure safety, the peer-led groups used modified defibrillators that could deliver only low-energy shocks.Blinded assessment was conducted using an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). The checklist items were based on International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) guidelines using Ebel standard-setting methods that emphasised patient and staff safety and clinical effectiveness.The results were analysed using Exact methods, chi-squared and t-test.ResultsA total of 132 students were randomised: 58 into the expert-led group, 74 into the peer-led group. 57/58 (98%) of students from the expert-led group achieved a Pass compared to 72/74 (97%) from the peer-led group: Exact statistics confirmed that it was very unlikely (p = 0.0001) that the expert-led group was 20% better than the peer-led group.There were no safety incidents, and High Pass grades were achieved by 64 (49%) of students: 33/58 (57%) from the expert-led group, 31/74 (42%) from the peer-led group. Exact statistics showed that the difference of 15% meant that it was possible that the expert-led teaching was 20% better at generating students with High Passes.ConclusionsThe key elements of advanced cardiac resuscitation can be safely and effectively taught to medical students in small groups by peer-instructors who have undergone basic medical education training.

Project description:BackgroundDespite conflicting results after surgically treated ankle fractures few studies have evaluated the effects of different types of training programs performed after plaster removal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a 12-week standardised but individually suited training program (training group) versus usual care (control group) after plaster removal in adults with surgically treated ankle fractures.MethodsIn total, 110 men and women, 18-64 years of age, with surgically treated ankle fracture were included and randomised to either a 12-week training program or to a control group. Six and twelve months after the injury the subjects were examined by the same physiotherapist who was blinded to the treatment group. The main outcome measure was the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) which rates symptoms and subjectively scored function. Secondary outcome measures were: quality of life (SF-36), timed walking tests, ankle mobility tests, muscle strength tests and radiological status.Results52 patients were randomised to the training group and 58 to the control group. Five patients dropped out before the six-month follow-up resulting in 50 patients in the training group and 55 in the control group. Nine patients dropped out between the six- and twelve-month follow-up resulting in 48 patients in both groups. When analysing the results in a mixed model analysis on repeated measures including interaction between age-group and treatment effect the training group demonstrated significantly improved results compared to the control group in subjects younger than 40 years of age regarding OMAS (p = 0.028), muscle strength in the plantar flexors (p = 0.029) and dorsiflexors (p = 0.030).ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that when adjusting for interaction between age-group and treatment effect the training model employed in this study was superior to usual care in patients under the age of 40. However, as only three out of nine outcome measures showed a difference, the beneficial effect from an additional standardised individually suited training program can be expected to be limited. There is need for further studies to elucidate how a training program should be designed to increase and optimise function in patients middle-aged or older.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ACTRN12609000327280.

Project description:ObjectiveTo test the effectiveness of peer support for patients with type 2 diabetes.DesignCluster randomised controlled.Setting20 general practices in the east of the Republic of Ireland.Participants395 patients (192 in intervention group, 203 in control group) and 29 peer supporters with type 2 diabetes.InterventionAll practices introduced a standardised diabetes care system. The peer support intervention ran over a two year period and contained four elements: the recruitment and training of peer supporters, nine group meetings led by peer supporters in participant's own general practice, and a retention plan for the peer supporters.Main outcome measuresHbA(1c); cholesterol concentration; systolic blood pressure; and wellbeing score.ResultsThere was no difference between intervention and control patients at baseline. All practices and 85% (337) of patients were followed up. At two year follow-up, there were no significant differences in HbA(1c) (mean difference -0.08%, 95% confidence interval -0.35% to 0.18%), systolic blood pressure (-3.9 mm Hg, -8.9 to 1.1 mm Hg), total cholesterol concentration (-0.03 mmol/L, -0.28 to 0.22 mmol/L), or wellbeing scores (-0.7, -2.3 to 0.8). While there was a trend towards decreases in the proportion of patients with poorly controlled risk factors at follow-up, particularly for systolic blood pressure (52% (87/166) >130 mm Hg in intervention v 61% (103/169) >130 mm Hg in control), these changes were not significant. The process evaluation indicated that the intervention was generally delivered as intended, though 18% (35) of patients in the intervention group never attended any group meetings.ConclusionsA group based peer support intervention is feasible in general practice settings, but the intervention was not effective when targeted at all patients with type 2 diabetes. While there was a trend towards improvements of clinical outcomes, the results do not support the widespread adoption of peer support. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42541690.

Dataset Information

Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial.

Objective

Design

Setting and participants

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets