Author: Brian S McGowan, PhD

INTRODUCTION:
Peer review, a cornerstone of academia, promotes rigor and relevance in scientific publishing. As educators are encouraged to adopt a more scholarly approach to medical education, peer review is becoming increasingly important. Junior educators both receive the reviews of their peers, and are also asked to participate as reviewers themselves. As such, it is imperative for junior clinician educators to be well-versed in the art of peer reviewing their colleagues’ work. In this article, our goal was to identify and summarize key papers that may be helpful for faculty members interested in learning more about the peer-review process and how to improve their reviewing skills.
METHODS:
The online discussions of the 2016-17 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator program included a robust discussion about peer review, which highlighted a number of papers on that topic. We sought to augment this list with further suggestions by guest experts and by an open call on Twitter for other important papers. Via this process, we created a list of 24 total papers on the topic of peer review. After gathering these papers, our authorship group engaged in a consensus-building process incorporating Delphi methods to identify the papers that best described peer review, and also highlighted important tips for new reviewers.
RESULTS:
We found and reviewed 24 papers. In our results section, we present our authorship group’s top five most highly rated papers on the topic of peer review. We also summarize these papers with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers.
CONCLUSION:
We present five key papers on peer review that can be used for faculty development for novice writers and reviewers. These papers represent a mix of foundational and explanatory papers that may provide some basis from which junior faculty members might build upon as they both undergo the peer-review process and act as reviewers in turn.

via Academic Primer Series: Key Papers About Peer Review. – PubMed – NCBI.

INTRODUCTION:
A proper understanding of study design is essential to creating successful studies. This is also important when reading or peer reviewing publications. In this article, we aimed to identify and summarize key papers that would be helpful for faculty members interested in learning more about study design in medical education research.
METHODS:
The online discussions of the 2016-2017 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine Faculty Incubator program included a robust and vigorous discussion about education study design, which highlighted a number of papers on that topic. We augmented this list of papers with further suggestions by expert mentors. Via this process, we created a list of 29 papers in total on the topic of medical education study design. After gathering these papers, our authorship group engaged in a modified Delphi approach to build consensus on the papers that were most valuable for the understanding of proper study design in medical education.
RESULTS:
We selected the top five most highly rated papers on the topic domain of study design as determined by our study group. We subsequently summarized these papers with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers.
CONCLUSION:
This article summarizes five key papers addressing study design in medical education with discussions and applications for junior faculty members and faculty developers. These papers provide a basis upon which junior faculty members might build for developing and analyzing studies.

via Academic Primer Series: Five Key Papers about Study Designs in Medical Education. – PubMed – NCBI.

CONTEXT:
Academic journals represent shared spaces wherein the significance of thematic areas, methodologies and paradigms are debated and shaped through collective engagement. By studying journals in their historical and cultural contexts, the academic community can gain insight into the ways in which authors and audiences propose, develop, harness, revise and discard research subjects, methodologies and practices.
METHODS:
Thirty top-cited articles published in Medical Education between 1986 and 2014 were analysed in a two-step process. First, a descriptive classification of articles allowed us to quantify the frequency of content areas over the time span studied. Secondly, a discourse analysis was conducted to identify the continuities, disruptions and tensions within the three most prominent content areas.
RESULTS:
The top-cited articles in Medical Education focused on three major areas of interest: problem-based learning, simulation and assessment. In each of these areas of interest, we noted a tension between the desire to produce and apply standardised tools, and the recognition that the contexts of medical education are highly variable and influenced by political and financial considerations. The general preoccupation with achieving efficiency may paradoxically jeopardise the ability of medical schools to address the contextual needs of students, teachers and patients.
CONCLUSIONS:
Understanding the topics of interest for a journal’s scholarly audience and how these topics are discursively positioned, provides important information for researchers in deciding how they wish to engage with the field, as well as for educators as they assess the relevance of educational products for their local contexts.

via In search of educational efficiency: 30 years of Medical Education’s top-cited articles. – PubMed – NCBI.

OBJECTIVE:
Major reorganizations of medical practice today challenge physicians’ ability to deliver compassionate care. We sought to understand how physicians who completed an intensive faculty development program in medical humanism sustain their humanistic practices.
METHODS:
Program completers from 8 U.S. medical schools wrote reflections in answer to two open-ended questions addressing their personal motivations and the barriers that impeded their humanistic practice and teaching. Reflections were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparative method.
RESULTS:
Sixty-eight physicians (74% response rate) submitted reflections. Motivating factors included: 1) identification with humanistic values; 2) providing care that they or their family would want; 3) connecting to patients; 4) passing on values through role modelling; 5) being in the moment. Inhibiting factors included: 1) time, 2) stress, 3) culture, and 4) episodic burnout.
CONCLUSIONS:
Determination to live by one’s values, embedded within a strong professional identity, allowed study participants to alleviate, but not resolve, the barriers. Collaborative action to address organizational impediments was endorsed but found to be lacking.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS:
Fostering fully mature professional development among physicians will require new skills and opportunities that reinforce time-honored values while simultaneously partnering with others to nurture, sustain and improve patient care by addressing system issues.

via How physicians draw satisfaction and overcome barriers in their practices: “It sustains me”. – PubMed – NCBI.