The impact of journal clubs on postgraduate medical education in China

Abstract

Purpose: Journal clubs hold significant importance in medical education, with numerous studies highlighting their contributions worldwide. However, studies specifically examining their role in China, particularly among Chinese medical postgraduates categorized into academic and clinical types, remain scarce. This research aims to investigate the participation, performance, and benefits of journal clubs, and explore the influence of student type and study phase on these aspects.

Method: A survey encompassing demographic information, participation rates, performance evaluations, and perceived improvements was distributed to postgraduates at Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. A total of 232 completed questionnaires were included for further analysis. Statistical analysis employed the Mann-Whitney U test and Gamma tests, with statistical significance set at p-value < 0.05.

Results: Overall participation and performance in journal clubs among Chinese medical postgraduates were comparable to global findings. Notably, academic postgraduates exhibited higher levels of attendance rate and gained more research assistance than clinical postgraduates, while their performance levels were similar. When considering the study phase, a downward trend in academic postgraduates' attendance rate and listening attitude and an upward trend in clinical postgraduates' participation were observed with the seniority phase. Additionally, presentation comments, post-presentation progress, and research assistance showed improvements over time for both student types.

Conclusions: This study reveals academic postgraduates' fatigue, contrasting with clinical postgraduates' enthusiasm, and underscores academic postgraduates' superior research assistance. To address these findings, we recommend supporting and encouraging scientific research training for clinical postgraduates, aiding academic postgraduates in better time management and reducing non-essential responsibilities, and implementing critical appraisal skill education.

Keywords: Academic; China; Clinical; Journal club; Medical postgraduates; Participation; Performance; Study phase.

Fig. 1

Participation, performance and gains of volunteers: attendance rate of 232 respondents (a). presentation time (b) and listening attitude (c) of 184 attendees, presentation comment of 151 presented postgraduates (d), progress after the presentation made by 151 presented postgraduates (e), and research assistance acquired by177 attendees approving of scientific support (f)

Fig. 2

Academic postgraduates exhibited better participation and research assistance acquired, *indicates statistical significance of Mann–Whitney U test in (a) and (b): (a) attendance rate of clinical and academic respondents, p < 0.001; (b) presentation time of clinical and academic attendees, p = 0.001*; (c) listening attitude of clinical and academic attendees, not statistically significant; (d) presentation comment of presented clinical and academic students; (e) progress after a presentation by presented clinical and academic students. (f) research assistance acquired by clinical and academic attendees approving scientific support

Fig. 3

Study phase classification revealed distinct participation trends between student types and time-promoting presentation comment, progress after the presentation and research assistance acquired, *indicates the statistical significance of gamma test (junior versus senior) and Mann–Whitney U test (academic versus clinical). (a) Attendance rate: junior versus senior academic postgraduates, γ = -0.168, not statistically significant, gamma test; junior versus senior clinical postgraduates, γ = 0.188, not statistically significant, gamma test; junior academic versus clinical postgraduates, p < 0.001*, Mann–Whitney U test; senior academic versus clinical postgraduates, not statistically significant, Mann–Whitney U test. (b) Presentation time: junior versus senior academic postgraduates, γ = 0.448, p < 0.001*, gamma test; junior versus senior clinical postgraduates, γ = -0.080, not statistically significant, gamma test; junior academic versus clinical postgraduates, not statistically significant, Mann–Whitney U test; senior academic versus clinical postgraduates, p = 0.001*, Mann–Whitney U test. (c) Listening attitude: junior versus senior academic postgraduates, γ = -0.217, not statistically significant, gamma test; junior versus senior clinical postgraduates, γ = 0.188, not statistically significant, gamma test; junior academic versus clinical postgraduates, or senior academic versus clinical postgraduates, not statistically significant, Mann–Whitney U test. (d) Presentation comment: all comparisons above are not statistically significant except for different grade academic students, Fisher’s exact test. (e) Progress after the presentation. (f) Research assistance was acquired