Hiraku Tsujimoto1, Yuki Kataoka2,3,4, Yukihito Sato5,6, Masahiro Banno7,8,9, Emi Tsujino-Tsujimoto10, Yukiyoshi Sumi11, Ryuichi Sada12, Takashi Fujiwara13, Yoichi Ohtake14, Junji Kumasawa15, Haruki Imura16, Yoshinobu Matsuda17, Ryuhei So7,18, Tomoko Kagawa19, Takashi Yoshioka20,21, Yu Uneno22, Hiroyuki Nagano23, Mai Akazawa24, Takunori Hozumi25, Yasushi Tsujimoto7,20,26. 1. Hospital Care Research Unit, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, Japan. hira_to_ber3598@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Hospital Care Research Unit, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, Japan. youkiti@gmail.com. 3. Systematic Review Workshop Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG), Osaka, Japan. youkiti@gmail.com. 4. Section of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Community Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. youkiti@gmail.com. 5. Hospital Care Research Unit, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, Japan. 6. Department of Cardiology, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Amagasaki, Japan. 7. Systematic Review Workshop Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG), Osaka, Japan. 8. Department of Psychiatry, Seichiryo Hospital, Nagoya, Japan. 9. Department of Psychiatry, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan. 10. Department of General Internal Medicine, Kanai Hospital, Kyoto, Japan. 11. Department of Psychiatry, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu, Japan. 12. Department of General Internal Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, Kamogawa, Japan. 13. Department of Otolaryngology Neck and Surgery, Kurashiki Central Hospital, Kurashiki, Japan. 14. Department of Internal Medicine, Itami Seifu Hospital, Itami, Japan. 15. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sakai City Medical Center, Sakai, Japan. 16. Department of Infectious Diseases, Rakuwakai Otowa Hospital, Kyoto, Japan. 17. Department of Psychosomatic Internal Medicine, National Hospital Organization Kinki-Chuo Chest Medical Center, Sakai, Japan. 18. Department of Health Promotion and Human Behavior, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine / School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan. 19. Department of Respiratory Medicine, National Hospital Organization Kinki-Chuo Chest Medical Center, Sakai, Japan. 20. Department of Healthcare Epidemiology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine / School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan. 21. Center for Innovative Research for Communities and Clinical Excellence (CiRC2LE), Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan. 22. Department of Therapeutic Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. 23. Department of Healthcare Economics and Quality Management, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. 24. Department of Anesthesiology, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu, Japan. 25. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Aichi Children's Health and Medical Center, Ohbu, Japan. 26. Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Kyoritsu Hospital, Kawanishi, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research engagement contributes to the improvement of patient care. A systematic review is a suitable first scholarly activity because it entails summarization of publicly available data and usually requires neither rigorous ethical review nor research funding. METHODS: This study aimed to develop a model workshop for healthcare staff to acquire skills in creating systematic review protocols based on their own clinical questions at teaching hospitals. We used an action research method to create a model workshop at four hospitals in Japan from April 2015 to March 2017. To improve the program, we solicited reflections using participant questionnaires for each lecture and examined the quality of homework submitted by participants after each lecture. We administered a revised final version of the workshop at five hospitals from April 2016 to March 2017. We evaluated the participants' scholarly productivity related to these workshops. The observation period was a minimum of 2 years following the workshops. RESULTS: Most participants had never developed a formal clinical research protocol and voluntarily participated in the workshop. The action research was developed and implemented at nine teaching hospitals in Japan, including one university hospital. The study developed a model nine-step workshop curriculum: 1) Research question development, 2) Search strategy development, 3) Search strategy brush-up, 4) Exclusion and inclusion criteria development, 5) Risk of bias assessment planning, 6) Meta-analysis planning, 7) Subgroup and sensitivity analysis planning, 8) Planning the presentation of results, and 9) Presentation protocols. A total of 233 participants, including medical doctors and other health professionals, produced 414 research questions. Seventy-nine participants (34%) completed the workshop, and 47 review teams accomplished systematic review protocols. The participants published 13 peer-reviewed articles as a result of the workshop. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a structured scholarly productive model workshop for healthcare staff working at hospitals. We found healthcare staff with clinical subspecialties were able to develop an unexpectedly high number of research questions through this workshop. Medical teachers at hospitals with prior systematic review experience could teach how to develop systematic review protocols using this model. Further research is needed to increase the academic productivity of such workshops. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN (https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/), UMIN000017107 (4/15/2015), UMIN000025580 (1/10/2017).
BACKGROUND: Research engagement contributes to the improvement of patient care. A systematic review is a suitable first scholarly activity because it entails summarization of publicly available data and usually requires neither rigorous ethical review nor research funding. METHODS: This study aimed to develop a model workshop for healthcare staff to acquire skills in creating systematic review protocols based on their own clinical questions at teaching hospitals. We used an action research method to create a model workshop at four hospitals in Japan from April 2015 to March 2017. To improve the program, we solicited reflections using participant questionnaires for each lecture and examined the quality of homework submitted by participants after each lecture. We administered a revised final version of the workshop at five hospitals from April 2016 to March 2017. We evaluated the participants' scholarly productivity related to these workshops. The observation period was a minimum of 2 years following the workshops. RESULTS: Most participants had never developed a formal clinical research protocol and voluntarily participated in the workshop. The action research was developed and implemented at nine teaching hospitals in Japan, including one university hospital. The study developed a model nine-step workshop curriculum: 1) Research question development, 2) Search strategy development, 3) Search strategy brush-up, 4) Exclusion and inclusion criteria development, 5) Risk of bias assessment planning, 6) Meta-analysis planning, 7) Subgroup and sensitivity analysis planning, 8) Planning the presentation of results, and 9) Presentation protocols. A total of 233 participants, including medical doctors and other health professionals, produced 414 research questions. Seventy-nine participants (34%) completed the workshop, and 47 review teams accomplished systematic review protocols. The participants published 13 peer-reviewed articles as a result of the workshop. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a structured scholarly productive model workshop for healthcare staff working at hospitals. We found healthcare staff with clinical subspecialties were able to develop an unexpectedly high number of research questions through this workshop. Medical teachers at hospitals with prior systematic review experience could teach how to develop systematic review protocols using this model. Further research is needed to increase the academic productivity of such workshops. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN (https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/), UMIN000017107 (4/15/2015), UMIN000025580 (1/10/2017).
Entities:
Keywords:
Action research; Continuing professional development; Scholarly activity; Systematic reviews
Authors: Belinda Y Chen; David E Kern; Robert M Kearns; Patricia A Thomas; Mark T Hughes; Sean Tackett Journal: Acad Med Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Jo-Ana D Chase; Robert Topp; Carol E Smith; Marlene Z Cohen; Nancy Fahrenwald; Julie J Zerwic; Lazelle E Benefield; Cindy M Anderson; Vicki S Conn Journal: West J Nurs Res Date: 2012-08-06 Impact factor: 1.967
Authors: David Moher; Larissa Shamseer; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2015-01-01
Authors: Olivia King; Emma West; Sarah Lee; Kristen Glenister; Claire Quilliam; Anna Wong Shee; Hannah Beks Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-05-19 Impact factor: 3.263
Authors: Leonard Ho; Fiona Y T Ke; Charlene H L Wong; Irene X Y Wu; Andy K L Cheung; Chen Mao; Vincent C H Chung Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2021-10-30 Impact factor: 4.615