Kristina Dzara1, Ariel S Frey-Vogel2. 1. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. Electronic address: kdzara@mgh.harvard.edu. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The traditional journal club (JC) format of reviewing an article followed by group discussion may be misaligned with millennial learners' needs and may not rely on best principles of adult learning. Our objective was to deliver an interactive JC allowing pediatric residents to critically engage with medical education research without previous preparation. METHODS: We conducted 4 one-hour "interactive, no-prep" medical education JCs for pediatric residents in a medium-sized program in 2018. Without previous reading, participants developed methods to answer the study question, compared that with actual methods, analyzed the results, and extrapolated the findings. We developed a simple, anonymous evaluation tool to determine perceived educational impact, analyzed using mixed methods. RESULTS: A total of 52 of 59 participants (88% response rate) indicated on a 7-point scale that the JC helped them think about how to analyze a paper (mean = 5.32), use a paper to inform further study questions (mean = 5.42), and understand medical education research (mean = 6.00). Four qualitative themes indicated that, although improvement was possible, it provided a strong interactive learning experience. CONCLUSIONS: Our JC approach using active learning principles and requiring no advance preparation is proof of concept that faculty's objectives to teach critical literature evaluation and millennial needs for engagement can be simultaneously met.
OBJECTIVE: The traditional journal club (JC) format of reviewing an article followed by group discussion may be misaligned with millennial learners' needs and may not rely on best principles of adult learning. Our objective was to deliver an interactive JC allowing pediatric residents to critically engage with medical education research without previous preparation. METHODS: We conducted 4 one-hour "interactive, no-prep" medical education JCs for pediatric residents in a medium-sized program in 2018. Without previous reading, participants developed methods to answer the study question, compared that with actual methods, analyzed the results, and extrapolated the findings. We developed a simple, anonymous evaluation tool to determine perceived educational impact, analyzed using mixed methods. RESULTS: A total of 52 of 59 participants (88% response rate) indicated on a 7-point scale that the JC helped them think about how to analyze a paper (mean = 5.32), use a paper to inform further study questions (mean = 5.42), and understand medical education research (mean = 6.00). Four qualitative themes indicated that, although improvement was possible, it provided a strong interactive learning experience. CONCLUSIONS: Our JC approach using active learning principles and requiring no advance preparation is proof of concept that faculty's objectives to teach critical literature evaluation and millennial needs for engagement can be simultaneously met.
Authors: Mara Taverna; Julian Nicolaus Bucher; Maximilian Weniger; Roswitha Gropp; Serene M L Lee; Barbara Mayer; Jens Werner; Alexandr V Bazhin Journal: GMS J Med Educ Date: 2022-02-15