Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Med Teach. 2022 Jan;44(1):57-62. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1963424. Epub 2021 Aug 17.
Online journal clubs (JCs) have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic with the resulting social distancing and popularity of online platforms. This systematic review aims to explore current evidence of their use/benefits for clinicians and compare their value to face-to-face (F2F) JCs.
PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched systematically, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Articles were included if they involved clinicians in medical/surgical populations, using an online JC assessing utility, experience and educational value. Quality assessment was undertaken using MERSQI.
Fifteen studies were included with findings synthesised into five themes: critical appraisal skills, satisfaction/value, accessibility/environment, evidence-based practice, and preference of online JC. Studies revealed high satisfaction and equivocal or increased preference of online JCs compared to F2F due to ease of access, diverse participation, and less time/cost spent travelling. Online JCs were found to be educationally valuable, aiding development of critical appraisal skills, and promoting change in practice. Disadvantages included lack of discussion intensity, technical issues, and limited interaction on some platforms.
Online JCs are educationally valuable with high satisfaction rates and distinct advantages/disadvantages to F2F JCs. More high-quality studies are required to elucidate the ideal format to further improve their educational value, utility, and adoption.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间，由于社交距离的限制和在线平台的普及，在线期刊俱乐部 (JC) 的数量有所增加。本系统评价旨在探讨目前关于其在临床医生中的使用/益处的证据，并将其与面对面 (F2F) JC 进行比较。
系统地检索了 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Scopus，遵循 PRISMA 指南。如果文章涉及医疗/外科人群中的临床医生，使用在线 JC 评估实用性、经验和教育价值，则将其纳入。使用 MERSQI 进行质量评估。
共纳入 15 项研究，研究结果综合为五个主题：批判性评估技能、满意度/价值、可及性/环境、循证实践和在线 JC 的偏好。研究表明，与 F2F 相比，在线 JC 具有较高的满意度和模棱两可或增加的偏好，因为其易于访问、多样化的参与和花费更少的时间/成本旅行。在线 JC 具有教育价值，有助于提高批判性评估技能，并促进实践的改变。缺点包括讨论强度不足、技术问题以及某些平台上的互动有限。
在线 JC 具有教育价值，满意度高，与 F2F JC 具有明显的优势/劣势。需要更多高质量的研究来阐明理想的格式，以进一步提高其教育价值、实用性和采用率。
