A CONTROLLED TRIAL OF A SEMINAR TO IMPROVE MEDICAL-STUDENT ATTITUDES TOWARD, KNOWLEDGE ABOUT, AND USE OF THE MEDICAL LITERATURE
A CONTROLLED TRIAL OF A SEMINAR TO IMPROVE MEDICAL-STUDENT ATTITUDES TOWARD, KNOWLEDGE ABOUT, AND USE OF THE MEDICAL LITERATURE
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/bf02599058
复制
发表时间：
1994-08-01
影响因子：
5.7
通讯作者：
HERBERS, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
LANDRY, FJ;PANGARO, L;HERBERS, J
目的：确定交互式研讨会是否会影响医学生的研究设计知识，基本的批判性评价技能，以及对医学文献的态度和临床使用。设计：对照，非随机临床试验。参与者：第三年的临床文员（n = 146）在他们的核心医学见习。干预措施：两个90分钟的交互式研讨会。测量和主要结果：前后问卷调查被用来评估知识和态度的使用医学文献中的65名研究和81名对照学生。对文献的盲态审查评估了医学文献的实际使用情况。总体而言，80%的学生订阅了一份或多份期刊，并报告每月阅读阅读三篇或更多期刊文章。干预后，研究学生比对照学生更可能考虑：1）研究设计在文章选择中的重要性和2）使用对患者护理决策至关重要的医学文献。研究组的知识得分显著提高（p = 0.0001）。与通常的见习目标所鼓励的相比，干预措施并没有增加患者记录中医学文献的实际使用量。51%的研究对象和48%的对照组学生在基线时引用了文献，53%的学生在干预后引用了文献。在这些引文中，50%是期刊文章，其余是教科书。学生很少提到的引用literation.Conclusions的质量：一个互动的研讨会，旨在介绍医学生的批判性评价提高了学生的知识和态度，但并没有增加实际使用的文献在病人的写作。
Objective: To determine whether an interactive seminar could affect medical student knowledge of research design, basic critical appraisal skills, and attitudes toward and clinical use of the medical literature.Design: Controlled, nonrandomized clinical trial.Participants: Third-year clinical clerks (n = 146) during their core medicine clerkship.Interventions: Two 90-minute interactive seminars.Measurements and main results: Pre- and postquestionnaires were used to assess knowledge and attitudes regarding the use of the medical literature among 65 study and 81 control students. Blinded review of write-ups assessed actual use of the medical literature. Overall, 80% of the students subscribed to one or more journals and reported reading three or more journal articles per month. After the intervention, the study students were more likely than the control students to consider: 1) study design important in article selection and 2) use of medical literature critical to patient care decisions. Knowledge scores were significantly improved in the study group (p = 0.0001). The intervention yielded no increase in the actual use of medical literature in patient write-ups over that encouraged by usual clerkship goals. 51% of the study and 48% of the control students cited literature at baseline, and 53% of all the students did so after the intervention. Of these citations, 50% were for journal articles and the remainder were for textbooks. The students infrequently mentioned the quality of the cited literature.Conclusions: An interactive seminar designed to introduce medical students to critical appraisal improved student knowledge and attitudes but did not increase the actual use of literature in patient write-ups.