Abstract
AIMS AND METHODIn response to frequent cancellations, we recently changed the format of our journal club. We invited a statistician to attend and each meeting focused specifically on critical appraisal and statistical analysis. Active learning principles were used where every participant critically appraised an aspect of the paper presented at each meeting. The aim of this paper was to evaluate the impact of the new format on attendance and satisfaction levels. Attendance and satisfaction levels were measured in the 3 months before and the 3 months after the new format was introduced.RESULTSAverage attendance increased from 10 to 15, with two psychologists and two trainees who did not work in the hospital starting to attend regularly. Satisfaction levels also increased significantly with respect to academic interest, enjoyment, usefulness and overall satisfaction.CONCLUSIONCombining statistical expertise with principles of active learning has led to increased satisfaction levels among participants in our journal club.
Highlights
Combining statistical expertise with principles of active learning has led to increased satisfaction levels among participants in our journal club
At a focus group held to identify the causes of the recent decline in enthusiasm, trainees attributed the problem to the introduction of the new clinical appraisal paper in the Membership exam
More senior trainees who had taken the Membership exam before the introduction of the new paper lacked confidence in chairing the meetings. Taking into account these concerns about the journal club, the focus group generated several suggestions to develop the journal club. We have implemented these suggestions and the aim of this paper is to evaluate the impact of the new format on attendance and satisfaction levels
Summary
New formatTrainees expressed a wish for the journal club to be made more relevant to their needs, with regard to statistics and the critical appraisal paper of the Membership examination, and the following changes were made:(a) A statistician who has a background in psychology was asked to attend the meetings on a weekly basis.(b) A list of papers that illustrates all the statistical terms and methods covered in the Membership curriculum was identified.(c) The nominated presenter reads the paper in advance and decides on a list of questions similar to those asked in the critical appraisal paper.(d) At the meeting, those attending are divided into small groups, given the paper to read and allocated several questions. Trainees expressed a wish for the journal club to be made more relevant to their needs, with regard to statistics and the critical appraisal paper of the Membership examination, and the following changes were made:. (c) The nominated presenter reads the paper in advance and decides on a list of questions similar to those asked in the critical appraisal paper. (f) At the end of the meeting, the presenter gives a brief resumeof the statistical questions that were mentioned in the paper and distributes a short (less than a page) definition of any terms considered relevant. We studied attendance and satisfaction in the last 3 months of the traditional journal club and the first 3 months of the new format using the following measures:. (a) the number of meetings cancelled (b) the average number of people attending the meeting (c) a 4-point Likert scale (1=no interest/satisfaction to 4=highly interesting/very satisfied) to examine clinical interest, academic interest, enjoyment and overall satisfaction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
