University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, 87131-0001, USA.
Am J Pharm Educ. 2011 May 10;75(4):62. doi: 10.5688/ajpe75462.
To implement and assess the effectiveness of an activity to teach pharmacy students to critically evaluate clinical literature using instructional scaffolding and a Clinical Trial Evaluation Rubric.
The literature evaluation activity centered on a single clinical research article and involved individual, small group, and large group instruction, with carefully structured, evidence-based scaffolds and support materials centered around 3 educational themes: (1) the reader's awareness of text organization, (2) contextual/background information and vocabulary, and (3) questioning, prompting, and self-monitoring (metacognition).
Students initially read the article, scored it using the rubric, and wrote an evaluation. Students then worked individually using a worksheet to identify and define 4 to 5 vocabulary/concept knowledge gaps. They then worked in small groups and as a class to further improve their skills. Finally, they assessed the same article using the rubric and writing a second evaluation. Students' rubric scores for the article decreased significantly from a mean pre-activity score of 76.7% to a post-activity score of 61.7%, indicating that their skills in identifying weaknesses in the article's study design had improved.
Use of instructional scaffolding in the form of vocabulary supports and the Clinical Trial Evaluation Rubric improved students' ability to critically evaluate a clinical study compared to lecture-based coursework alone.
实施并评估一项活动的效果，该活动旨在通过教学支架和临床试验评估量表教导药学专业学生批判性地评估临床文献。
文献评估活动以一篇临床研究文章为中心，包括个人、小组和大组指导，围绕 3 个教育主题精心构建了基于证据的支架和支持材料：（1）读者对文本组织的认识，（2）背景信息和词汇，以及（3）提问、提示和自我监控（元认知）。
学生最初阅读文章，使用量表评分，并撰写评估。然后，学生使用工作表独立工作，以确定和定义 4 到 5 个词汇/概念知识差距。然后，他们在小组和全班中进一步提高技能。最后，他们使用量表评估同一篇文章并撰写第二次评估。学生对文章的量表评分从活动前的平均 76.7%显著下降到活动后的 61.7%，表明他们识别文章研究设计弱点的能力有所提高。
与仅基于讲座的课程相比，使用词汇支持和临床试验评估量表等教学支架的形式可以提高学生批判性评估临床研究的能力。
