| Title |
Effect of changing journal clubs from traditional method to evidence-based method on psychiatry residents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Medical Education and Practice, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/amep.s110036 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Farhad Faridhosseini, Ali Saghebi, Majid Khadem-Rezaiyan, Fatemeh Moharari, Maliheh Dadgarmoghaddam |
| Abstract |
Journal club is a valuable educational tool in the medical field. This method follows different goals. This study aims to investigate the effect on psychiatry residents of changing journal clubs from the traditional method to the evidence-based method. This study was conducted using a before-after design. First- and second-year residents of psychiatry were included in the study. First, the status quo was evaluated by standardized questionnaire regarding the effect of journal club. Then, ten sessions were held to familiarize the residents with the concept of journal club. After that, evidence-based journal club sessions were held. The questionnaire was given to the residents again after the final session. Data were analyzed through descriptive statistics (frequency and percentage frequency, mean and standard deviation), and analytic statistics (paired t-test) using SPSS 22. Of a total of 20 first- and second-year residents of psychiatry, the data of 18 residents were finally analyzed. Most of the subjects (17 [93.7%]) were females. The mean overall score before and after the intervention was 1.83±0.45 and 2.85±0.57, respectively, which showed a significant increase (P<0.001). Moving toward evidence-based journal clubs seems like an appropriate measure to reach the goals set by this educational tool. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Librarian | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 42% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 8% |
| Psychology | 1 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2016.
All research outputs
#17,562,823
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,541
of 382,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Medical Education and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 382,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them