目的:本范围审查的目的是(1)描述有关辩论式期刊俱乐部对健康专业学习者的文献评估技能的效用的可用文献,以及(2)报告在专业教育背景下的辩论式期刊俱乐部研究和评估中发现的主题。
结果:本范围审查共纳入27篇英文文章。已发表的对辩论式期刊俱乐部的评估主要基于药学专业(48%,n=13),但在其他卫生专业中也有报道,如药物(22%,n=6),牙科(15%,n=4),护理(7%,n=2),职业治疗(4%,n=1),和物理治疗(4%,n=1),也是。这些研究中评估的技能通常包括批判性文献评估,文献在病人护理中的应用,批判性思维,知识保留,使用辅助文献,和特定于辩论的技能。学习者通常报告对文献有更好的理解和应用,比传统的期刊俱乐部更享受这种体验,但请注意,评估员和学习者的辩论时间要求增加。药学学习者特定的文章更经常使用传统的,以团队为基础的辩论形式,纳入技能评估和辩论表现的分级规则,并在课程中包含了辩论的评分部分。
结论:辩论式期刊俱乐部深受学习者欢迎,但需要额外的时间投入。辩论平台,格式,规则的使用和验证,结果评估因已发布的报告而异。
The objectives of this scoping review are to (1) describe the available literature regarding the utility of the
debate-style journal club for health professional learners on literature evaluation skills and (2) report the themes found within
debate-style journal club research and assessments in the context of professional education.
A total of 27 articles written in the English language were included in this scoping review. Published evaluations of debate-style journal clubs have been predominantly based in the pharmacy profession (48%, n = 13), but are reported in other health professions, such as medicine (22%, n = 6), dentistry (15%, n = 4), nursing (7%, n = 2), occupational therapy (4%, n = 1), and physical therapy (4%, n = 1), as well. The skills assessed in these studies often included critical literature evaluation, application of literature to patient care, critical thinking, knowledge retention, use of supporting literature, and debate-specific skills. Learners typically reported better understanding and application of the literature, and enjoying the experience more than traditional journal clubs, but note the increased assessor and learner time requirement for debating. Pharmacy learner-specific articles more often utilized a traditional, team-based debate format, incorporated grading rubrics for skill assessment and
debate performance, and included a grading component for the
debate in the course.
Debate-style journal clubs are well-received by learners but require an additional time commitment. Debate platforms, format, rubric use and validation, and outcome assessment vary across published reports.