Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
What makes an article a must read in medical education?
Nakhostin-Ansari, Amin; Mirabal, Susan C; Mendes, Thiago Bosco; Ma, Yuxing Emily; Saldanha Neves Horta Lima, Carolina; Chapla, Kavita; Reynolds, Stasia; Oswalt, Hannah; Wright, Scott M; Tackett, Sean.
Afiliación
  • Nakhostin-Ansari A; Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. a-nansari@alumnus.tums.ac.ir.
  • Mirabal SC; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Mendes TB; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  • Ma YE; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Saldanha Neves Horta Lima C; School of Medicine of University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
  • Chapla K; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
  • Reynolds S; Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Oswalt H; Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine, Spartanburg, SC, USA.
  • Wright SM; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Tackett S; Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA.
BMC Med Educ ; 24(1): 582, 2024 May 28.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38807077
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The dissemination of published scholarship is intended to bring new evidence and ideas to a wide audience. However, the increasing number of articles makes it challenging to determine where to focus one's attention. This study describes factors that may influence decisions to read and recommend a medical education article.

METHODS:

Authors analyzed data collected from March 2021 through September 2022 during a monthly process to identify "Must Read" articles in medical education. An international team of health sciences educators, learners, and researchers voted on titles and abstracts to advance articles to full text review. Full texts were rated using five criteria relevance, methodology, readability, originality, and whether it addressed a critical issue in medical education. At an end-of-month meeting, 3-4 articles were chosen by consensus as "Must Read" articles. Analyses were used to explore the associations of article characteristics and ratings with Must Read selection.

RESULTS:

Over a period of 19 months, 7487 articles from 856 journals were screened, 207 (2.8%) full texts were evaluated, and 62 (0.8%) were chosen as Must Reads. During screening, 3976 articles (53.1%) received no votes. BMC Medical Education had the largest number of articles at screening (n = 1181, 15.8%). Academic Medicine had the largest number as Must Reads (n = 22, 35.5%). In logistic regressions adjusting for the effect of individual reviewers, all rating criteria were independently associated with selection as a Must Read (p < 0.05), with methodology (OR 1.44 (95%CI = 1.23-1.69) and relevance (OR 1.43 (95%CI = 1.20-1.70)) having the highest odds ratios.

CONCLUSIONS:

Over half of the published medical education articles did not appeal to a diverse group of potential readers; this represents a missed opportunity to make an impact and potentially wasted effort. Our findings suggest opportunities to enhance value in the production and dissemination of medical education scholarship.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto / Educación Médica Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Med Educ Asunto de la revista: EDUCACAO Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Irán Pais de publicación: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto / Educación Médica Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Med Educ Asunto de la revista: EDUCACAO Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Irán Pais de publicación: Reino Unido