Impact of a National Journal Club and Letter Writing Session on Improving Medical Students’ Confidence with Critical Appraisal

Figures & data

Table 1 Critical Appraisal Teaching Programme

Session	Duration	Description
Critical appraisal lecture	20 minutes	Teaching session on critical appraisal to groups of 12–16 students.
Critical appraisal of journal article	20 minutes	Students read through the abstract of a peer-reviewed journal article and annotate critical appraisal hand-outs with comments.
Break	10 minutes
Group discussion	30 minutes	Students discuss strengths and weaknesses of article in groups.
Closing remarks	10 minutes	Tutors organise the students’ thoughts into a rough structure for a letter to the editor.
Ongoing mentorship	After the course	Students work together to write up the letter to the editor. Tutors provide advice and edit or check the letter as required.

Figure 1 Flowchart depicting design of the critical appraisal course.

Table 2 Participant Characteristic Frequencies (%)

Sex
Male	32 (43)
Female	42 (57)
Year of study
First Year	9 (12)
Second Year	16 (21)
Third Year	20 (27)
Intercalating	12 (16)
Penultimate Year	15 (20)
Final Year	2 (3)
Previous research publication
Yes	9 (12)
No	65 (88)
Previous letter to editor
Yes	5 (7)
No	69 (93)
Previous attendance at medical conference
Yes	40 (54)
No	34 (46)
Previous attendance at critical appraisal workshop
Yes	9 (12)
No	65 (88)
Total	74

Table 3 Mean Results*

Question	Pre-Course Mean	Post-Course Mean	Difference^#
I feel confident in critical appraising research articles	2.38	4.31	1.93
I have experience in critical appraisal	2.30	4.22	1.92
I have some knowledge in assessing the methodology of research articles	2.68	4.18	1.50
I feel confident in writing letters to the editor	1.80	4.24	2.45
I understand why critical appraisal is important for my career	2.92	4.36	1.45
The session was structured appropriately	–	4.32	–
The session was appropriate for my level of understanding	–	4.36	–
The session met its objectives	–	4.41	–
The delivery was effective and clear	–	4.32	–
The resources provided were useful	–	4.35	–
The session increased my understanding of critical appraisal and/or letters to editors	–	4.45	–
The session was useful to my career	–	4.42	–

Notes: *Questions were graded on a likert scale from 1–5 with a score of 5 indicated strong agreement with a statement. ^#Subject to rounding.

Table 4 Analysis of Themes from Participants’ Free Text Feedback

Theme	Number of Times Mentioned in Feedback
Most Useful Aspects of Course
Opportunity to write up a letter with guidance	16
Content of lecture at the start of the course	15
Small-group format	11
Quality of tutors	7
Practical opportunity to analyse a research paper	4
Teaching resources provided	4
Areas for Improvement
More time for the course overall	14
Opportunity to read the journal article in advance of the session	8
Smaller group sizes	6
More time dedicated to practical/interactive tasks rather than didactic teaching	5
Improved structure of the course	4
Written resources to include examples of critically appraised articles	3
A follow-up session after the course	2
More time for didactic teaching at the start of the course	1