Study objective: We sought to determine whether peer reviewers who attend a formal interactive training session produce better reviews. Methods: Peer reviewers were invited to attend a formal, 4-hour, highly interacti...
详细信息
Study objective: We sought to determine whether peer reviewers who attend a formal interactive training session produce better reviews. Methods: Peer reviewers were invited to attend a formal, 4-hour, highly interactive workshop on peer review. Attendees received a sample manuscript to read and review in writing in advance. The workshop included presentations on analyzing a study and the journal's expectations for a quality review, discussion of the sample manuscript's flaws and how to address them in a review, discussion of the reviews written by the attendees, and discussion of real reviews of other manuscripts illustrating key points. The performance of attendees on the basis of standard editor quality ratings (I to 5) was assessed for the 2 years after workshop attendance. Control reviewers matched for previous review quality and volume were selected from nonattendees of the workshop. In study 1, all average reviewers received a standard written invitation. In study 2, 75 randomly selected average reviewers were personally and actively recruited with intensive follow-up by means of e-mail and telephone calls in an effort to reduce self-selection bias. Results: In study 1, 25 reviewers volunteered for the course, were eligible for study, attended, and were compared with 25 matched control reviewers. Of attendees filling out evaluations, 19% thought it somewhat and 81% thought it very helpful. All thought it would improve their subsequent reviews, and 85% thought it would improve their review ratings. The mean change in rating after the workshop was 0.11 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to 0.48) for control reviewers and 0.10 (95% CI -0.20 to 0.39) for attendees. In study 2, of 75 reviewers intensively recruited, only 12 (41%) of those who said they would attend did. All of the participants thought the workshop would improve their performance and ratings. Test scores at the end of the workshop improved in 73% of participants compared with scores on pretests. Th
Objective: In 1975, Donald Light, Jr., presented a "sociological calendar" as a paradigm for describing the important dimensions and stages of social and professional development in psychiatric residency tra...
详细信息
Objective: In 1975, Donald Light, Jr., presented a "sociological calendar" as a paradigm for describing the important dimensions and stages of social and professional development in psychiatric residency training. The authors sought to develop an updated calendar and to determine if the calendar is consistent with attitudes of residents in various stages of their training. Methods: A new sociological calendar was developed after conducting a focus group with chief residents. The Osgood Semantic Differential Survey (OSD) was used to measure residents' attitudes, and the results were compared with the modified calendar. Results: The updated calendar differs considerably from Light's original calendar. Findings from the OSD were generally consistent with the updated calendar. Conclusions: A modern sociological calendar illustrates the relatively predictable transitions that residents go through over the course of their training. By better understanding these stages of development, supervisors and residency directors may become more effective in their teaching and support efforts. (Academic Psychiatry 2003;27:31-38).
Objective: To determine the extent of medical toxicology training provided in U.S. psychiatry residency programs. Medical toxicology is a newly recognized field of medicine. Many patient consultations are common to ps...
详细信息
Objective: To determine the extent of medical toxicology training provided in U.S. psychiatry residency programs. Medical toxicology is a newly recognized field of medicine. Many patient consultations are common to psychiatrists and medical toxicologists, including intentional drug overdoses and adverse reactions to psychotropic medications. Methods: The authors surveyed the directors of all accredited U.S. psychiatry residency programs by mail to determine how much formal training in medical toxicology, if any, is provided in these programs. Results: Eighty program directors (48.6%) responded. Replies indicated that only 4% of psychiatry residency programs were affiliated with institutions offering defined medical toxicology electives. Although residents in 65% of programs could choose to design a medical toxicology elective, this had been done in only 2 programs. Only 41% of programs responding offered specific didactic lectures on medical toxicology topics to psychiatry residents. Conclusions: The results suggest that few psychiatry residency programs have formal medical toxicology training curricula and that, in programs responding to the survey, little interaction occurs between medical toxicologists and psychiatry residents. (Academic Psychiatry 2003;27:50-53).
暂无评论