Project description:Rationale: Learning styles (LS) of medical residents change over time from the more passive Assimilator toward more active preferences like Accommodator or Converger. We have shown pharmacy residents to be predominantly Assimilators at the start of their residency program. Whether learning styles of pharmacy residents change after they enter practice has never been studied. Objective: To describe the evolution of learning styles of pharmacy residents as they transition from residency into practice. Study Design and Methods: Prospective observational survey and semi-structured interviews. A complete provincial cohort of former pharmacy residents (n=28) who had their LS characterized during their residency and were now 1 year post-residency were invited to repeat the Pharmacists’ Inventory of Learning Styles (PILS). Interviews were administered to consenting participants to gain additional insights. Results: 27 residents (96%) completed the PILS survey and 16 (59%) completed the interview. 13 (48%) changed their dominant LS and 20 (74%) changed their secondary LS. Six (22%) participants did not change either LS. The overall proportion of dominant Assimilators (59%) and Convergers (26%) remained similar to baseline (52% and 26%, respectively), meaning participants had adopted and abandoned different learning styles in similar numbers. Change in LS was associated with receiving preceptor training (p<0.05). Of the 12 preceptors interviewed, 58% stated that they had adjusted their teaching practices based on knowledge of their LS. Conclusions: Change in dominant and/or secondary learning style is common after 1 year in practice compared to during pharmacy practice residency. There is no overall direction to the shifts, however, with residents transitioning in and out of more active learning styles with similar frequency. Overall after a year in practice, the cohort of former residents we studied remained mostly Assimilators, who prefer passive learning approaches. These results contrast with medical students, who adopt more active preferences like Accommodator.
Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of a conference abstract is to summarize the main points of a research-related report that will be presented at an academic conference. However, some conferences accept and publish abstracts without results, which is contrary to the basic idea of a conference abstract as a dissemination tool. A conference abstract without results included is called a "promissory abstract". This study aimed to analyze the frequency and characteristics of promissory conference abstracts, i.e. abstracts submitted without results, accepted at Cochrane Colloquia.MethodsWe analyzed 8297 conference abstracts accepted at 25 Cochrane Colloquia, organized in 1994-2020, which were publicly available on the website of the Cochrane Library. Two authors screened abstracts to identify promissory abstracts. We extracted characteristics of promissory abstracts.ResultsAmong abstracts accepted for Cochrane Colloquia, 8.7% were promissory; 475 (66%) were accepted as poster presentations, 241 (34%) as oral presentations and 1 as a workshop. The median number of authors in promissory abstracts was 4 (interquartile range: 3 to 6 authors). In 245 (34%) promissory abstracts, affiliations of authors were not reported. The authors were most commonly affiliated with the following countries: UK (472; 36%), Canada (N = 123; 26%), China (N = 76; 16%), United States (N = 66; 14%) and Australia (N = 53; 11%). There were 512 (71%) promissory abstracts in which study design was not reported.ConclusionPromissory abstracts were commonly accepted at Cochrane Colloquia. Such abstracts deserve further attention, as they are detrimental in terms of the dissemination of new knowledge presented at a conference. Conference organizers could ask authors to update the abstract results subsequently to enable the dissemination of information presented at a conference.
Project description:Sponsorship: Publication of this supplement was sponsored by the Association for the Study of Obesity (ASO). All content was reviewed and approved by the ASO Committee, which held full responsibility for the abstract selections.