Predictive Validity Evidence for Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument Scores: Quality of Submissions to JGIM’s Medical Education Special Issue

Reed, Darcy A.; Beckman, Thomas J.; Wright, Scott M.; Levine, Rachel B.; Kern, David E.; Cook, David A.

doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0664-3

Cited by 223 publications

(214 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

196

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings are consistent with the results of Reed et al, which looked at MERSQI scores for full manuscripts in MERSQI Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, UME undergraduate medical education, GME graduate medical education, CME continuing medical education MERSQI Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument, UME undergraduate medical education, GME graduate medical education, CME continuing medical education both original research and education innovations. 14 In this study, the average MERSQI score was 10.3 (SD 2.2) for original articles, compared to 8.3 (SD 2.7) for educational innovations, which is comparable to the difference of 1.57 in our study. 14 The current study also demonstrated a lower acceptance rate of 23 % for IME abstracts compared to 42 % for scientific medical education abstracts.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…14 In this study, the average MERSQI score was 10.3 (SD 2.2) for original articles, compared to 8.3 (SD 2.7) for educational innovations, which is comparable to the difference of 1.57 in our study. 14 The current study also demonstrated a lower acceptance rate of 23 % for IME abstracts compared to 42 % for scientific medical education abstracts. Furthermore, Reed et al found that educational innovations scored significantly lower in the same domains that we identified (sampling, validity, and data analysis).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…We found a significant and meaningful difference in MERS QI scores of 0.80 (9. 14 In this study, a 1.0 increase in the MERSQI score was associated with over 30 % higher likelihood of publication. Another study, in which the MERSQI was applied to a broad sample of published medical education research, found that higher MERSQI scores were associated with higher 3-year citation rates (0.8 increase in score per 10 Citations) and a higher impact factor of the journal of publication (1.0 increase in score per 6-unit increase in impact factor).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…We used the MERSQI, a previously validated tool with strong content, criterion, and predictive validity evidence for quantitative research, to assess the quality of quantitative medical education abstracts. 14,16,17 The MERSQI contains 10 items (overall score range 5-18) within six domains of study quality: study design, sampling, data type, validity of assessments, data analysis, and outcomes. The complete MERSQI can be found in the original MERSQI validation study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,5 Using the validated Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI), Reed et al demonstrated that the quality of medical education manuscripts predicted acceptance in peer-reviewed journals. 14 However, it is unknown whether this measure of quality is associated with subsequent publication of these abstracts in indexed journals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Association Between Study Quality and Publication Rates of Medical Education Abstracts Presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Studies reveal that 44.5 % of abstracts presented at national meetings are subsequently published in indexed journals, with lower rates for abstracts of medical education scholarship. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether the quality of medical education abstracts is associated with subsequent publication in indexed journals, and to compare the quality of medical education abstracts presented as scientific abstracts versus innovations in medical education (IME). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Medical education abstracts presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) 2009 annual meeting. MAIN MEASURES: Publication rates were measured using database searches for full-text publications through December 2013. Quality was assessed using the validated Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). KEY RESULTS: Overall, 64 (44 %) medical education abstracts presented at the 2009 SGIM annual meeting were subsequently published in indexed medical journals. The MERSQI demonstrated good inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation range, 0.77-1.00) for grading the quality of medical education abstracts. MERSQI scores were higher for published versus unpublished abstracts (9.59 vs. 8.81, p=0.03). Abstracts with a MERSQI score of 10 or greater were more likely to be published (OR 3.18, 95 % CI 1.47-6.89, p=0.003). ). MERSQI scores were higher for scientific versus IME abstracts (9.88 vs. 8.31, p<0.001). Publication rates were higher for scientific abstracts (42 [66 %] vs. 37 [46 %], p=0.02) and oral presentations (15 [23 %] vs. 6 [8 %], p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The publication rate of medical education abstracts presented at the 2009 SGIM annual meeting was similar to reported publication rates for biomedical research abstracts, but higher than publication rates reported for medical education abstracts. MERSQI scores were associated with higher abstract publication rates, suggesting that attention to measures of quality-such as sampling, instrument validity, and data analysis-may improve the likelihood that medical education abstracts will be published.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 49%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Association Between Study Quality and Publication Rates of Medical Education Abstracts Presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Learning to Detect, Categorize, and Identify Skin Lesions

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Effect of Teaching Nontechnical Skills in Advanced Life Support: A Systematic Review

Dewolf

Clarebout

Wauters

et al. 2020

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of nontechnical skills (NTS) training on performance in advanced life support (ALS) simulation. Furthermore, we aimed to determine the ideal frequency of training sessions for an optimal retention and the value of debriefing.Methods: A systematic search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, WoS, ERIC, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library conducted through August 1, 2018. All primary studies mentioning NTS in ALS education were included. Three reviewers independently extracted data on study design and outcome. The MERSQI approach was used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence.Results: Of the 10,723 identified articles, 40 studies were included with a combined total of 3,041 participants, ranging from students to experts. Depending on the focus of the study, articles were categorized in NTS (n = 25), retention (n = 8), and feedback (n = 10). Incorporating NTS during ALS simulation showed significant improvements in timing for performing critical first steps. Furthermore, good leadership skills had a favorable effect on overall technical performance and teamwork during simulation improved team dynamics and performance. Finally, debriefing also had a beneficial effect on team performance. One particular type of debriefing does not appear to be superior to other types of debriefing. Conclusion:Team simulation training resulted in improved NTS and a reduction in the time required to complete a simulated cardiac arrest. Therefore, a formal NTS program should be introduced into ALS courses. Feedback and repetitive practice are key factors to train NTS. The impact of training on team behaviors can persist for at least 3 to 6 months. In conclusion, understanding and improving NTS may help to create more effective teams. The effect on patient outcome requires further investigation.S urvival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) remains low around 10.3% with survival depending on location of arrest, initial rhythm, and patient and rescue factors. 1 Therefore, the American Heart Association (AHA) and European Resuscitation Council (ERC) guidelines emphasize the importance of technical skills (TS). 2 However, errors are frequently the result of failure in nontechnical skills (NTS). 3 Therefore, the quality of NTS in terms of teamwork, leadership, communication, and situational awareness is likely just as important for achieving a better patient outcome. [3][4][5][6][7] As a result, NTS training was recently included in several medical courses, including the advanced life support (ALS) course. [8][9][10][11] This training can potentially reduce patient morbidity and mortality by enabling

show abstract

Predictive Validity Evidence for Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument Scores: Quality of Submissions to JGIM’s Medical Education Special Issue

Cited by 223 publications

References 21 publications

Association Between Study Quality and Publication Rates of Medical Education Abstracts Presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting

Association Between Study Quality and Publication Rates of Medical Education Abstracts Presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting

Learning to Detect, Categorize, and Identify Skin Lesions

The Effect of Teaching Nontechnical Skills in Advanced Life Support: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About