Journal clubs have been a staple in scientific communities, facilitating discussions on recent publications. However, the overwhelming volume of biomedical information poses a challenge in literature selection. This article provides an overview of journal club types and their efficacy in training potential peer reviewers, enhancing communication skills, and critical thinking. Originating in the 19th century, journal clubs have evolved from traditional in-person meetings to virtual or hybrid formats, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Face-to-face interactions offer personal connections, while virtual events ensure wider participation and accessibility. Organizing journal clubs demands effort, but it has several benefits, including promoting new publications and providing a platform for meaningful discussions. The virtual CardioRNA J-club experience exemplifies successful multidisciplinary collaboration, fostering international connections and inspiring new research. Journal clubs remain a vital component of academic research, equipping senior researchers with the latest developments and nurturing the next generation of scientists. As millennial and Gen Z researchers join the scientific field, journal clubs continue to evolve as a fertile ground for education and collaborative learning in an ever-changing scientific landscape.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in simulator technology, live anaesthetised animals continue to be used as human patient simulators for medical professionals to practice techniques in the management of surgical trauma. This article describes the process of convening a working group of individuals with a professional interest in simulation to discuss the use of live animals and consider if and how they can be replaced in the future.
METHODS: A working group was formed of voluntary attendees to a workshop held at the SESAM 2023 conference. Iterative discussions reflecting on the topic were used to produce statements summarising the working group\'s opinions. The working group determined that live animals are used as human patient simulators due to the presence of accurate and responsive physiology in the presence of bleeding, realistic tissue tactility and an emotional response experienced by the learner due to interaction with the animal. They were unable to reach a consensus on replacement, determining that there is currently no single model which is able to provide all the learning aspects which a live animal model can provide. Several suggestions were made regarding development of technologies and pedagogical change.
CONCLUSIONS: Replacement of live animals in surgical simulation is not straightforward but should be an aspiration, if possible. For the ongoing development of trauma surgical simulation models, it is important to combine the knowledge, skills and perspectives of medical stakeholders and educators, academic researchers and industry experts in producing alternative options to the use of live animal simulators.

Introduction: Biomedical Science distance learning courses offer flexibility in study while in employment. Asynchronous and self-learning approaches are common within such courses and often student-student interaction is limited. The aims of this study were to establish learning communities, develop confidence in participating in online teamwork and foster an appreciation of transferable skills including digital capabilities through remote group activities. Materials and Methods: Two cohorts of students (n = 20/n = 21) were enrolled in a microbiology module of an IBMS accredited MSc distance learning course. Groups of 4-5 students produced a digital output relating to current global infection-related issues, namely, assignment 1, production of a slide deck, which peers could use as learning resources and assignment 2, a voiceover PowerPoint debate, and infographic, voting assessment and peer/self-marking. Students also prepared reflections using written format and a FlipGrid video-recording. A qualitative content analysis was conducted on reflections from all students. Students completed a pre- and post-assignment survey focused on the development of transferable skills for the biomedical sector. Results: Students\' skills and confidence increased following completion of the group assignment, as evident from the pre- and post-questionnaire responses, namely, possession of digital skills and digital creation abilities (29% v 83%), applying for jobs which require digital skills (54% v 89%), talking about examples of using digital media during job interviews (21% v 78%) and demonstration of creativity during assignment tasks (33% v 90%). Critical thinking was more commonly demonstrated during the debate in comparison to the slide deck activity (p = 0.001). The importance of developing digital skills, was higher following completion of the group activities (p = 0.03). Students reflected on the value of the group activities in relation to knowledge acquisition (85%, 86%), collegiality (70%, 71%), digital skills development (80%, 90%), the fact that the activities were enjoyable (70%, 67%) and the development of peer interaction and support (50%, 67%) in relation to assignment 1 and 2, respectively. Discussion: Increasingly digital technologies are being used in the healthcare sector resulting in updated HCPC Standards of Proficiency. This study highlights that virtual group activities promote the establishment of supportive learning communities and the development of transferable skills including digital capabilities for application within the biomedical science workplace.

暂无摘要。

The COVID-19 pandemic affected healthcare systems worldwide, including the National Health Service (NHS). It drastically changed the practice and delivery of healthcare and laid bare longstanding structural flaws. It also brought a time of innovation and digitalisation and renewed appreciation of the role of public health. This paper offers a thematic summary of a debate held in December 2021 by the University of Edinburgh School of Medicine. It featured a multi-specialty panel of doctors and patient representative discussing the likely impact of the pandemic on the future of NHS. It serves as a reflection point on the pressures the NHS has faced since and their likely genesis at a time when the impact of the pandemic on staff risks being forgotten.

At the 2021 annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association, the Basic Science Focus Forum hosted its first ever debate-style symposium focused on biomechanics and fracture repair. The 3 subjects of debate were \"Mechanics versus Biology-Which is \'More Important\' to Consider?\" \"Locked Plate versus Forward Dynamization versus Reverse Dynamization-Which Way Should I Go?\" and \"Sawbones versus Cadaver Models-What Should I Believe Most?\" These debates were held because fracture healing is a highly organized synergistic response between biological factors and the local mechanical environment. Multiple studies have demonstrated that both factors play roles in governing bone healing responses, and the causal relationships between the 2 remain unclear. The lack of clarity in this space has led to a spectrum of research with the common goal of helping surgeons make good decisions. Before reading further, the reader should understand that the questions posed in the debate titles are unanswerable and might represent a false choice. Instead, the reader should appreciate that the debates were held to gain a more thorough understanding of these topics based on the current state of the art of experimental and clinical studies, by using an engaging and thought-provoking format.

Intellectual humility, which entails openness to other views and a willingness to listen and engage with them, is crucial for facilitating civil dialogue and progress in debate between opposing sides. In the present research, we tested whether intellectual humility can be reliably detected in discourse and experimentally increased by a prior self-affirmation task. Three hundred and three participants took part in 116 audio- and video-recorded group discussions. Blind to condition, linguists coded participants\' discourse to create an intellectual humility score. As expected, the self-affirmation task increased the coded intellectual humility, as well as participants\' self-rated prosocial affect (e.g. empathy). Unexpectedly, the effect on prosocial affect did not mediate the link between experimental condition and intellectual humility in debate. Self-reported intellectual humility and other personality variables were uncorrelated with expert-coded intellectual humility. Implications of these findings for understanding the social psychological mechanisms underpinning intellectual humility are considered.

Objective. To study how a debate format could be a helpful tool to enhance group functionality and decision-making in schools of pharmacy.Methods. This study examines the potential of a debate format to facilitate discussion and shift viewpoints. Changes in viewpoint and feedback from the Academic Leadership Fellows Program (ALFP) Cohort 16 debates at the February 2020 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Interim Meeting generated two data sets for each discussion topic to analyze debate effectiveness. Pre- and post-debate audience viewpoints were compared to determine the extent to which debates influenced viewpoints. Continuing pharmacy education (CPE) evaluations of the debate learning objectives provided information on participants\' views of the debate format.Results. The debate format appeared to shift opinions on all three topics discussed. In addition, audience members responded in agreement or strong agreement that the debate format was of benefit to both leadership interactions and team environments.Discussion. While group functionality is an important aspect of effective decision-making, it is not always considered in pharmacy school operations. Incorporating debate components could improve the quality of group functionality, thereby positively impacting decision-making in schools of pharmacy.

暂无摘要。