PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: In this era of evidence-based medicine, only systematic research can help in providing judicious and precise healthcare to individual patients based on updated knowledge and skills. However, many medical professionals do not feel competent and confident enough to conduct research. One of the reasons could be the lack of a research-based curriculum in undergraduate courses. The National Medical Council has also stressed the need for formal training in research methodology for healthcare professionals. The research methodology workshops help to familiarize the participants with basic, clinical, and translational research required to impart optimum patient care. The objective of our study was to evaluate a research methodology workshop conducted for postgraduate students by assessing the participant\'s knowledge, feedback, and expected impact using Kirkpatrick\'s evaluation model.
METHODS: A quasi-experimental, single-group study was conducted among 132 first-year postgraduate students. The four levels of Kirkpatrick\'s model were applied for evaluation. Feedback forms, scores of the pretest and posttest, quality of the research proposal drafted by the postgraduates for their thesis, and finally successful submission of the research proposal were the components used to evaluate the four levels of outcome of Kirkpatrick\'s model.
METHODS: Data collected were compiled and tabulated into MS Excel. Proportions were calculated for categorical variables and mean and standard deviation (SD) for scores. A comparison of means between pre- and postworkshop scores was made with paired t-test. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was done using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20.0 software.
RESULTS: Out of 132 participants, 29% (38) were males and 71% (94) were females. The mean ± SD pretest and posttest scores at a 95% confidence interval were 10.55 ± 2.537 and 12.43 ± 2.484, respectively. The difference was found to be statistically significant by paired sample t-test (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Participant feedback is vital for improving research methodology workshops. The workshop met the overall requirements of the participants. There was a significant improvement in the knowledge of participants after the workshop completion.
METHODS: A quasi-experimental, single-group study was conducted among 132 first-year postgraduate students. The four levels of Kirkpatrick\'s model were applied for evaluation. Feedback forms, scores of the pretest and posttest, quality of the research proposal drafted by the postgraduates for their thesis, and finally successful submission of the research proposal were the components used to evaluate the four levels of outcome of Kirkpatrick\'s model.
METHODS: Data collected were compiled and tabulated into MS Excel. Proportions were calculated for categorical variables and mean and standard deviation (SD) for scores. A comparison of means between pre- and postworkshop scores was made with paired t-test. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was done using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20.0 software.
RESULTS: Out of 132 participants, 29% (38) were males and 71% (94) were females. The mean ± SD pretest and posttest scores at a 95% confidence interval were 10.55 ± 2.537 and 12.43 ± 2.484, respectively. The difference was found to be statistically significant by paired sample t-test (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Participant feedback is vital for improving research methodology workshops. The workshop met the overall requirements of the participants. There was a significant improvement in the knowledge of participants after the workshop completion.
摘要：
背景：在这个循证医学的时代，只有系统的研究才能帮助根据最新的知识和技能为个体患者提供明智和精确的医疗保健。然而,许多医疗专业人员没有足够的能力和信心来进行研究。原因之一可能是本科课程中缺乏基于研究的课程。国家医学委员会还强调需要对医疗保健专业人员进行研究方法的正式培训。研究方法研讨会有助于使参与者熟悉基本的，临床,和转化研究需要给予最佳的病人护理。我们研究的目的是通过评估参与者的知识来评估为研究生进行的研究方法研讨会，反馈,使用柯克帕特里克的评估模型和预期影响。
方法：准实验，在132名一年级研究生中进行了单组研究。采用四个层次的柯克帕特里克模型进行评价。反馈表单,前测和后测的分数，研究生为论文起草的研究提案的质量，最终成功提交的研究提案是用于评估Kirkpatrick模型四个水平结果的组件。
方法：收集的数据被编译并制成MSExcel。计算分类变量的比例以及分数的平均值和标准偏差(SD)。使用配对t检验对车间前和车间后分数之间的均值进行比较。P<0.05的值被认为是统计学上显著的。使用IBMSPSSStatistics版本20.0软件进行统计分析。
结果：在132名参与者中，29%(38)为男性，71%(94)为女性。95%置信区间的平均±SD前测和后测分数分别为10.55±2.537和12.43±2.484。通过配对样本t检验发现差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001)。
结论：参与者的反馈对于改进研究方法研讨会至关重要。讲习班满足了与会者的总体要求。研讨会结束后，参与者的知识有了显著提高。
方法：准实验，在132名一年级研究生中进行了单组研究。采用四个层次的柯克帕特里克模型进行评价。反馈表单,前测和后测的分数，研究生为论文起草的研究提案的质量，最终成功提交的研究提案是用于评估Kirkpatrick模型四个水平结果的组件。
方法：收集的数据被编译并制成MSExcel。计算分类变量的比例以及分数的平均值和标准偏差(SD)。使用配对t检验对车间前和车间后分数之间的均值进行比较。P<0.05的值被认为是统计学上显著的。使用IBMSPSSStatistics版本20.0软件进行统计分析。
结果：在132名参与者中，29%(38)为男性，71%(94)为女性。95%置信区间的平均±SD前测和后测分数分别为10.55±2.537和12.43±2.484。通过配对样本t检验发现差异具有统计学意义(P<0.001)。
结论：参与者的反馈对于改进研究方法研讨会至关重要。讲习班满足了与会者的总体要求。研讨会结束后，参与者的知识有了显著提高。
