pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Instructional scaffolding to improve students' skills in evaluating clinical literature - PubMed

  • ️Sat Jan 01 2011

Instructional scaffolding to improve students' skills in evaluating clinical literature

Stefani Dawn et al. Am J Pharm Educ. 2011.

Abstract

Objective: To implement and assess the effectiveness of an activity to teach pharmacy students to critically evaluate clinical literature using instructional scaffolding and a Clinical Trial Evaluation Rubric.

Design: The literature evaluation activity centered on a single clinical research article and involved individual, small group, and large group instruction, with carefully structured, evidence-based scaffolds and support materials centered around 3 educational themes: (1) the reader's awareness of text organization, (2) contextual/background information and vocabulary, and (3) questioning, prompting, and self-monitoring (metacognition).

Assessment: Students initially read the article, scored it using the rubric, and wrote an evaluation. Students then worked individually using a worksheet to identify and define 4 to 5 vocabulary/concept knowledge gaps. They then worked in small groups and as a class to further improve their skills. Finally, they assessed the same article using the rubric and writing a second evaluation. Students' rubric scores for the article decreased significantly from a mean pre-activity score of 76.7% to a post-activity score of 61.7%, indicating that their skills in identifying weaknesses in the article's study design had improved.

Conclusion: Use of instructional scaffolding in the form of vocabulary supports and the Clinical Trial Evaluation Rubric improved students' ability to critically evaluate a clinical study compared to lecture-based coursework alone.

Keywords: clinical trial evaluation; evidence-based medicine; instructional model; literature evaluation; literature evaluation rubric; scaffolds in instruction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1

Refined Clinical Literature Evaluation Instructional Model.

Figure 2
Figure 2

Article analysis scores given by students for specific elements in the major article sections (n = 51, p < 0.003).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Fundamental tools for understanding and applying the medical literature and making clinical diagnoses. http://JAMAevidence.com. Accessed February 26, 2010.
    1. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Accreditation standards and guidelines for the professional program in pharmacy leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy degree. http://www.acpe-accredit.org/standards/. Released February 17, 2006. Accessed January 24, 2011.
    1. Blommel ML, Abate MA. A rubric to assess critical literature evaluation skills. Am J Pharm Educ. 2007;71(4):63. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Burstein JL, Hollander JE, Barlas D. Enhancing the value of journal club: use of a structured review instrument. Am J Emerg Med. 1996;14(6):561–564. - PubMed
    1. Dirschl DR, Tornetta P, III, Bhandari M. Designing, conducting, and evaluating journal clubs in orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;413:146–157. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms