Measuring medical student preference: a comparison of classroom versus online instruction for teaching PubMed.

OBJECTIVE: The research analyzed evaluation data to assess medical student satisfaction with the learning experience when required PubMed training is offered entirely online. METHODS: A retrospective study analyzed skills assessment scores and student feedback forms from 455 first-year medical students who completed PubMed training either through classroom sessions or an online tutorial. The class of 2006 (n = 99) attended traditional librarian-led sessions in a computer classroom. The classes of 2007 (n = 120), 2008 (n = 121), and 2009 (n = 115) completed the training entirely online through a self-paced tutorial. PubMed skills assessment scores and student feedback about the training were compared for all groups. RESULTS: As evidenced by open-ended comments about the training, students who took the online tutorial were equally or more satisfied with the learning experience than students who attended classroom sessions, with the classes of 2008 and 2009 reporting greater satisfaction (P<0.001) than the other 2 groups. The mean score on the PubMed skills assessment (91%) was the same for all groups of students. CONCLUSIONS: Student satisfaction improved and PubMed assessment scores did not change when instruction was offered online to first-year medical students. Comments from the students who received online training suggest that the increased control and individual engagement with the web-based content led to their satisfaction with the online tutorial.

Real-time EBM: from bed board to keyboard and back.

BACKGROUND: To practice Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), physicians must quickly retrieve evidence to inform medical decisions. Internal Medicine (IM) residents receive little formal education in electronic database searching, and have identified poor searching skills as a barrier to practicing EBM. OBJECTIVE: To design and implement a database searching tutorial for IM residents on inpatient rotations and to evaluate its impact on residents' skill and comfort searching MEDLINE and filtered EBM resources. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. Residents randomized to the searching tutorial met for up to 6 1-hour small group sessions to search for answers to questions about current hospitalized patients. PARTICIPANTS: Second- and 3rd-year IM residents. MEASUREMENTS: Residents in both groups completed an Objective Structured Searching Evaluation (OSSE), searching for primary evidence to answer 5 clinical questions. OSSE outcomes were the number of successful searches, search times, and techniques utilized. Participants also completed self-assessment surveys measuring frequency and comfort using EBM databases. RESULTS: During the OSSE, residents who participated in the intervention utilized more searching techniques overall (p < .01) and used PubMed's Clinical Queries more often (p < .001) than control residents. Searching "success" and time per completed search did not differ between groups. Compared with controls, intervention residents reported greater comfort using MEDLINE (p < .05) and the Cochrane Library (p < .05) on post-intervention surveys. The groups did not differ in comfort using ACP Journal Club, or in self-reported frequency of use of any databases. CONCLUSIONS: An inpatient EBM searching tutorial improved searching techniques of IM residents and resulted in increased comfort with MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library, but did not impact overall searching success.

The changing library: what clinicians need to know.

Over the last two decades, changes in technology have allowed academic medical center libraries to bring the world of biomedical information to the physician's computer desktop. Because digital libraries have grown so rapidly and in so many ways, some clinicians may be uncertain about the services and resources that are available to them. This article explains how clinical faculty can best utilize their library to support their research and patient care. It addresses some of the most common myths about the "new" medical library, and it highlights innovations in library resources and services that can help physicians to better access, use and manage medical information.