2019年麻醉学教育研究的批判性评估
Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2019.
作者信息
Zisblatt Lara, Chen Fei, Dillman Dawn, DiLorenzo Amy N, MacEachern Mark P, Juve Amy Miller, Peoples Emily E, Snarskis Connor, Grantham Ashley E
机构信息
The following authors are in the Department of Anesthesiology at University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI: is Education Specialist; is Assistant Professor, Director of Anesthesia Internship, and Associate Program Director of Education; and is Anesthesiology Resident. is Assistant Professor in the Department of Anesthesiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. The following authors are in the Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine at Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR: is Professor, and is Associate Professor. is Assistant Dean of Graduate Medical Education at University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Lexington, KY, and Education Specialist and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Anesthesiology at University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Lexington, KY. is Informationist in the Taubman Health Sciences Library, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. is Medical Education Learning Specialist in the Department of Anesthesiology at Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
出版信息
J Educ Perioper Med. 2022 Apr 1;24(2):1-21. doi: 10.46374/volxxiv_issue2_zisblatt. eCollection 2022 Apr-Jun.
BACKGROUND
This study reviews and appraises the articles published about anesthesiology education in 2019. Through this critical appraisal, those interested in anesthesiology education are able to quickly review literature published during this year and explore innovative ways to improve education for all those involved in the practice of anesthesiology.
METHODS
Three Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, ERIC, and PsycINFO were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles were subsequently scored by 3 randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by 2 raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies; both allowed for scores ranging from 1 to 25. In addition, reviewers rated each article on its overall quality to create an additional list of top articles based solely on the opinion of the reviewers.
RESULTS
A total of 2374 unique citations were identified through the search criteria and the manual review. Of those, 70 articles met the inclusion criteria (62 quantitative and 8 qualitative). The top 12 quantitative papers and the top 2 qualitative papers with the highest scores were reported and summarized. This critical appraisal continues to be a useful tool for those working in anesthesiology education by highlighting the best research articles published over the year. Highlighting trends in medical education research in anesthesiology can help those in the field to think critically about the direction of this type of research.
背景
本研究回顾并评估了2019年发表的关于麻醉学教育的文章。通过这种批判性评估，对麻醉学教育感兴趣的人能够快速回顾当年发表的文献，并探索创新方法，以改善所有参与麻醉学实践人员的教育。
方法
检索了三个Ovid MEDLINE数据库、Embase.com、教育资源信息中心（ERIC）和心理学文摘数据库（PsycINFO），随后对麻醉学和医学教育领域影响因子最高的期刊上发表的文章进行了人工筛选。摘要进行了双盲筛选，定量文章随后由3名随机分配的评分者评分。定性研究由2名评分者评分。定量和定性研究使用了两种不同的评分标准；两种标准的评分范围均为1至25分。此外，评审人员根据每篇文章的整体质量进行评分，以仅根据评审人员的意见创建一份顶级文章的补充清单。
结果
通过检索标准和人工筛选，共识别出2374条独特的引文。其中，70篇文章符合纳入标准（62篇定量研究和8篇定性研究）。报告并总结了得分最高的前12篇定量论文和前2篇定性论文。这种批判性评估通过突出当年发表的最佳研究文章，继续成为麻醉学教育工作者的有用工具。突出麻醉学医学教育研究的趋势可以帮助该领域的人员批判性地思考这类研究的方向。
Zotero 插件