The impact of critical appraisal workshops on residents' evidence based medicine skills and knowledge

Neurosurgery Residents' Satisfaction Toward Their Saudi Training Program: Insights from a National Survey

BACKGROUND

Given the high-stakes nature of their work, neurosurgery residents face constant pressure and require high-quality training to succeed. We aim to investigate the satisfaction levels of residents with their Saudi Neurosurgery Residency Training Program (SNRTP) and its influential factors.

METHODS

This is a nationwide, cross-sectional study that employed a questionnaire, structured based on the relevant literature, which was disseminated to neurosurgery residents, commencing from December 2021 and culminating in September 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 70 out of 143 neurosurgery residents were included, giving a response rate of 48.9%. Most participants (62.9%) aged 24-28 years old, 55.7% were males, and 40.0% were from the Central region of Saudi Arabia. The residents were further divided into juniors (R1-R3; 64.3%) and seniors (R4-R6; 35.7%). Approximately 13.3% of the juniors were satisfied with the SNRTP, whereas only 8.0% of the seniors were satisfied. Dissatisfaction rates over the SNRTP were significantly higher in the seniors (68.0%) compared to the juniors (28.9%; P = 0.006). The frequency of operating room sessions per week and presence of protected research time were the only 2 factors significantly associated with the junior and senior residents' satisfaction, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The SNRTP has a vision to provide the society with elite competent neurosurgeons. However, we found a degree of dissatisfaction among the residents, indicating a need for improving the SNRTP's policies. We recommend incorporating more hands-on training opportunities, implementing a mentorship model, setting tailored teaching sessions, and establishing resident wellness programs. We hope this study initiate dialogue on promoting residents' satisfaction and overall well-being.

Teaching Real-World Evidence: Protocol for a Systematic Review

Background

Real-world evidence (RWE) refers to observational health care data beyond clinical trial data. It holds the promise of transforming health care as a new form of evidence to support decision makers in making decisions when developing and regulating medicines. As the importance of RWE is recognized by industry and regulatory bodies, teaching RWE becomes an important matter to evaluate and refine in order to develop future researchers and stakeholders who can better integrate RWE into the routine development of medicine.

Objective

The aim of this review is to understand how RWE is currently being taught. From this landscape study, the insufficiencies of the current education of RWE can be identified and subsequently inform future education policies around RWE and its subfacets.

Methods

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Healthcare Management Information Consortium, Cochrane, and Web of Science for published studies using a combination of keywords and subject headings related to RWE and education. In addition, a Google search to identify grey literature will be conducted. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts identified from the search and accept or reject the studies according to the study inclusion criteria; any discrepancies will be discussed and resolved. The quality of the included literature will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme systematic review checklist.

Results

Data from eligible publications will be abstracted into a predesigned form in order to better understand the current state of education of RWE and inform future RWE education directions and policies.

Conclusions

The subsequent systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/16941

Teaching Real-World Evidence: Protocol for a Systematic Review (Preprint).. [DOI: 10.2196/preprints.16941] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

BACKGROUND

Real-world evidence (RWE) refers to observational health care data beyond clinical trial data. It holds the promise of transforming health care as a new form of evidence to support decision makers in making decisions when developing and regulating medicines. As the importance of RWE is recognized by industry and regulatory bodies, teaching RWE becomes an important matter to evaluate and refine in order to develop future researchers and stakeholders who can better integrate RWE into the routine development of medicine.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to understand how RWE is currently being taught. From this landscape study, the insufficiencies of the current education of RWE can be identified and subsequently inform future education policies around RWE and its subfacets.

METHODS

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Healthcare Management Information Consortium, Cochrane, and Web of Science for published studies using a combination of keywords and subject headings related to RWE and education. In addition, a Google search to identify grey literature will be conducted. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts identified from the search and accept or reject the studies according to the study inclusion criteria; any discrepancies will be discussed and resolved. The quality of the included literature will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme systematic review checklist.

RESULTS

Data from eligible publications will be abstracted into a predesigned form in order to better understand the current state of education of RWE and inform future RWE education directions and policies.

CONCLUSIONS

The subsequent systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT

PRR1-10.2196/16941

A prospective mixed-methods study evaluating the integration of an evidence based medicine curriculum into an internal medicine residency program

INTRODUCTION

Evidence based medicine (EBM) skills are often lacking in the general internal medicine physician population. Our aim is to evaluate the impact of our internal medicine EBM curriculum on the residents' EBM skills and knowledge through mixed methods.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed that evaluated the EBM curriculum: quantitatively, with pre/posttests and qualitatively through a focus group that addressed residents' opinion on the educational and clinical impact of each aspect of the curriculum.

RESULTS

A total of 60 internal medicine residents were surveyed. Short-term EBM skills: therapy workshops (N=25) median pretest score of 8 (IQR): [6-9]) vs posttest 8 (IQR: [8-9]), (p=0.006); diagnosis (N=16) pretest score of 6 (IQR: [3-6]) vs posttest 7 (IQR: [6-9]), (p=0.006); systematic review (N=13) pretest score of 4 (IQR: [4-6]) vs posttest 7 (IQR: [6-8]), (p=0.002); and harm (N=16) pretest score of 6 (IQR: [5-7]) vs posttest 7 (IQR: [7-8]), (p=0.004). Long-term EBM skills: Fresno test of competence in EBM, pretest median score of 110.5/212 (IQR: 96.0-124.0) and a median posttest score of 115/212 (IQR: 100.0-130.0) (p=0.60). Having previous EBM training, being actively involved in research and being the first author on a publication was associated with higher Fresno test scores. Focus group provided qualitative feedback on the residents' EBM curriculum perception.

CONCLUSION

This curriculum adds a significant contribution to the current field of medical education as it fills an important educational gap, through defining ways of effectively delivering EBM concepts which led to improvement in residents' ability to evaluate and apply medical literature. The EBM curriculum was overall well received by the residents.