Dataset Information

Chinese Obstetrics & Gynecology journal club: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To assess whether a journal club model could improve comprehension and written and spoken medical English in a population of Chinese medical professionals. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:The study population consisted of 52 medical professionals who were residents or postgraduate master or PhD students in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Heilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, China. INTERVENTION:After a three-part baseline examination to assess medical English comprehension, participants were randomised to either (1) an intensive journal club treatment arm or (2) a self-study group. At the conclusion of the 8-week intervention participants (n=52) were re-tested with new questions. OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was the change in score on a multiple choice examination. Secondary outcomes included change in scores on written and oral examinations which were modelled on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). RESULTS:Both groups had improved scores on the multiple choice examination without a statistically significant difference between them (90% power). However, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups in mean improvement in scores for both written (95% CI 1.1 to 5.0; p=0.003) and spoken English (95% CI 0.06 to 3.7; p=0.04) favouring the journal club intervention. CONCLUSIONS:Interacting with colleagues and an English-speaking facilitator in a journal club improved both written and spoken medical English in Chinese medical professionals. Journal clubs may be suitable for use as a self-sustainable teaching model to improve fluency in medical English in foreign medical professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01844609.

SUBMITTER: Tsui IK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4735128 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Chinese Obstetrics & Gynecology journal club: a randomised controlled trial.

Tsui Ilene K IK Dodson William C WC Kunselman Allen R AR Kuang Hongying H Han Feng-Juan FJ Legro Richard S RS Wu Xiao-Ke XK

BMJ open 20160128 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess whether a journal club model could improve comprehension and written and spoken medical English in a population of Chinese medical professionals.<h4>Setting and participants</h4>The study population consisted of 52 medical professionals who were residents or postgraduate master or PhD students in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Heilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, China.<h4>Intervention</h4>After a three-part baseline examination to assess medica ...[more]

PMID: 26823180

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Citation analysis is a bibliometric method that uses citation rates to evaluate research performance. This type of analysis can identify the articles that have shaped the modern history of obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN). Objectives:To identify and characterize top-cited OBGYN articles in the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science's Science Citation Index Expanded and to compare top-cited OBGYN articles published in specialty OBGYN journals with those published in nonspecialty journals. Design, Setting, and Participants:Cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of top-cited articles that were indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded from 1980 to 2018. The Science Citation Index Expanded was queried using search terms from the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology's 2018 certifying examination topics list. The top 100 articles from all journals and the top 100 articles from OBGYN journals were evaluated for specific characteristics. Data were analyzed in March 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures:The articles were characterized by citation number, publication year, topic, study design, and authorship. After excluding articles that featured on both lists, top-cited articles were compared. Results:The query identified 3?767?874 articles, of which 278?846 (7.4%) were published in OBGYN journals. The top-cited article was published by Rossouw and colleagues in JAMA (2002). Top-cited articles published in nonspecialty journals were more frequently cited than those in OBGYN journals (median [interquartile range], 1738 [1490-2077] citations vs 666 [580-843] citations, respectively; P?<?.001) and were more likely to be randomized trials (25.0% vs 2.2%, respectively; difference, 22.8%; 95% CI, 13.5%-32.2%; P?<?.001). Whereas articles from nonspecialty journals focused on broad topics like osteoporosis, articles from OBGYN journal focused on topics like preeclampsia and endometriosis. Conclusions and Relevance:This study found substantial differences between top-cited OBGYN articles published in nonspecialty vs OBGYN journals. These differences may reflect the different goals of the journals, which work together to ensure optimal dissemination of impactful articles.

Project description:IntroductionA journal club (JC) is a commonly used medical educational tool. Videoconferencing technology can facilitate the delivery of JCs, however, there remains no evidence on the role of web-based virtual JCs in promoting the acquisition and retention of medical knowledge. The Web-Ed trial aims to evaluate the educational benefits, feasibility and acceptability of web-based virtual JCs compared with traditional face-to-face ones.Methods and analysisWeb-Ed is a multicentre pragmatic parallel-group randomised trial across teaching hospitals within the UK National Health Service (NHS). We will enrol qualified doctors or medical students who are >18 years old, proficient in English and able to use online videoconferencing software. Block randomisation will be used to allocate participants in 1:1 ratio to either intervention group. Both groups will be presented with the same educational material and follow a standardised JC structure hosted by nominated moderators and medical faculty members.The primary outcome is the difference in participants' knowledge acquisition and retention 7 days after the JCs evaluated using standardised multiple-choice questions. We will report secondarily on the feasibility and acceptability of the JCs using Likert scale questionnaires. Assuming a 30% drop-out rate, we aim to enrol 75 participants to detect a 20% improvement in knowledge acquisition at 80% power and 5% significance. We will report using mean difference or risk ratio with 95% CIs and assess significance using parametric/non-parametric testing. Where relevant, we will adjust for predetermined characteristics (age, grade of training and session duration) using multivariate regression analyses.Ethics and disseminationWeb-Ed was designed by doctors in training to address their learning needs and evaluate the preferred mode of learning. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant scientific conferences. The trial has been approved by the NHS Health Regulation Authority (21/HRA/3361).Trial registration numberISRCTN18036769.

Project description:Background: The course "Psychosomatic Primary Care" has been part of the training curriculum of obstetrics and gynecology in Germany since 2003. The aim of the course is to train up physicians, whose prior training primarily focussed on somatic care, to enable them to offer care also taking into account biopsychosocial aspects. Taking the guidelines for psychotherapy as a template, the aim of psychosomatic primary care is to recognize the etiological links between psychological and somatic factors which contribute to diseases. The necessity for a compulsory course as part of training in gynecology was recently critically discussed. Major points discussed included the question whether the current forms of teaching, consisting of courses, are outdated and whether the required skills should be part of regular daily training. Method: A 3-part online questionnaire consisting of 30 items was developed and sent to 2431 residents in the period from September to December 2012 through the online mailing list of the DGGG. Results: The 540 residents who responded to the questionnaire were predominantly female (83.3?%) with an average age of 30 years; 50.3?% were in their 1st to their 4th year of training. Over the longer term, the majority of respondents (56.1?%) hoped to continue working in a hospital and regularly (84.6?%) attended teaching courses voluntarily. 70.9?% of them had already attended the course "Psychosomatic Primary Care". Of the group who had completed the course, 29.4?% were satisfied with the offer. The main criticism directed against the course was its scope which 24.1?% considered completely inadequate. 24.5?% considered the course to be an important part of training, while 16.5?% would have preferred that the course be abolished. 18?% of respondents reported that psychosomatic medicine did not feature regularly in their daily clinical routine. Perspective: Because of the huge gap between what is currently offered and the experiences reported by the respondents, the Young Forum of the DGGG and the DGPFG have expanded the program of courses offered by the DGPFG, which will offer practice-oriented courses to future gynecologists across Germany in cooperation with the DAGG. The first courses are held in Heidelberg and Erlangen in 2014.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the planning of subgroup analyses in protocols of randomised controlled trials and the agreement with corresponding full journal publications.DesignCohort of protocols of randomised controlled trial and subsequent full journal publications.SettingSix research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada.Data sources894 protocols of randomised controlled trial involving patients approved by participating research ethics committees between 2000 and 2003 and 515 subsequent full journal publications.ResultsOf 894 protocols of randomised controlled trials, 252 (28.2%) included one or more planned subgroup analyses. Of those, 17 (6.7%) provided a clear hypothesis for at least one subgroup analysis, 10 (4.0%) anticipated the direction of a subgroup effect, and 87 (34.5%) planned a statistical test for interaction. Industry sponsored trials more often planned subgroup analyses compared with investigator sponsored trials (195/551 (35.4%) v 57/343 (16.6%), P<0.001). Of 515 identified journal publications, 246 (47.8%) reported at least one subgroup analysis. In 81 (32.9%) of the 246 publications reporting subgroup analyses, authors stated that subgroup analyses were prespecified, but this was not supported by 28 (34.6%) corresponding protocols. In 86 publications, authors claimed a subgroup effect, but only 36 (41.9%) corresponding protocols reported a planned subgroup analysis.ConclusionsSubgroup analyses are insufficiently described in the protocols of randomised controlled trials submitted to research ethics committees, and investigators rarely specify the anticipated direction of subgroup effects. More than one third of statements in publications of randomised controlled trials about subgroup prespecification had no documentation in the corresponding protocols. Definitive judgments regarding credibility of claimed subgroup effects are not possible without access to protocols and analysis plans of randomised controlled trials.

Dataset Information

Chinese Obstetrics & Gynecology journal club: a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Chinese Obstetrics & Gynecology journal club: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets