Clinical questions asked by medical students: a learning tool for dermatology rotations.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To determine whether having medical students answer self-generated patient-specific questions in a clinical setting promotes learning. METHODS: Medical students rotating through dermatology clinics at the Denver Veterans' Affairs (VA) Medical Center were asked to formulate and answer one clinical question arising during patient encounters, and to complete a survey regarding their findings and experience. RESULTS: 49% (44/89) of rotating medical students completed the exercise. Self-generated questions frequently addressed therapy (61%, 27/44), prognosis (13%, 6/44), etiology/risk factors (7%, 3/44), and harm (5%, 2/44). The most frequently used sources of clinical information were journal abstracts/articles (55%, 24/44), UpToDate (50%, 22/44), websites (27%, 12/44) and printed textbooks (25%, 11/44). Medical students rated the impact of answers they obtained on a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) for the following: can be used to assist in patient's care (mean 4.1), improved care (mean 3.7), improved communication (mean 4.4), improved confidence in care (mean 4.2), improved knowledge (mean 4.6), and will improve future care (mean 4.5). CONCLUSIONS: Medical students report increased knowledge, confidence and patient care skills after completing a self-directed formal exercise consisting of formulating and answering a patient-specific clinical question.

Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatology.

BACKGROUND: The Cochrane collaboration aims to produce high-quality systematic reviews. It is not known whether the methods used in producing Cochrane Skin Group (CSG) reviews result in higher quality reviews than other systematic reviews in dermatology. OBJECTIVES: To determine how the methodological quality of dermatological CSG reviews published in The Cochrane Library and in peer-reviewed journals compare with non-Cochrane systematic reviews. METHODS: Two blinded investigators independently assessed review quality using the 10-item Oxman and Guyatt scale. RESULTS: Thirty-eight systematic reviews (17 Cochrane reviews published in The Cochrane Library, 11 Cochrane reviews published in peer-reviewed journals and 10 non-Cochrane reviews published in peer-reviewed journals) were examined. The Cochrane Library reviews included quality of life (11/17 vs. 1/10, P = 0.014) and adverse outcomes (14/17 vs. 2/10, P = 0.003) more often than non-Cochrane reviews published in peer-reviewed journals. Cochrane reviews published in both peer-reviewed journals and The Cochrane Library were more likely to include comprehensive search strategies (11/11 and 17/17 vs. 6/10, P-values = 0.04 and 0.01), take steps to minimize selection bias (11/11 and 16/17 vs. 3/10, P-values = 0.003 and 0.001) and appropriately assess the validity of all included trials (10/11 and 16/17 vs. 4/10, P-values = 0.04 and 0.007) than non-Cochrane reviews. Overall, Cochrane reviews published both in peer-reviewed journals and in The Cochrane Library were assigned higher quality scores by reviewers than non-Cochrane reviews (median = 6.0 and 6.5 vs. 4.5, P-values = 0.01 and 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The Cochrane Library systematic review methodology leads to higher quality reviews on dermatological topics.

Statins and fibrates for preventing melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment for advanced melanoma is lacking. While no drug therapy currently exists for prevention of melanoma, in vitro, case-control, and animal model evidence suggest that lipid-lowering medications, commonly taken for high cholesterol, might prevent melanoma. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of statin or fibrate lipid-lowering medications on melanoma outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (February 2003), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2005), MEDLINE (to March 2003), EMBASE (to September 2003), CANCERLIT (to October 2002), Web of Science (to May 2003), and reference lists of articles. We approached study investigators and pharmaceutical companies for additional information (published or unpublished studies). SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials involving random allocation of study participants, where experimental groups used statins or fibrates and participants were enrolled for at least four years of therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors screened 109 abstracts of articles with titles of possible relevance. We then thoroughly examined the full text of 72 potentially relevant articles. We requested unpublished melanoma outcomes data from the corresponding author of each qualifying trial. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 16 qualifying randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (seven statin, nine fibrate). Thirteen of these trials (involving 62,197 participants) provided data on incident melanomas (six statin, seven fibrate). A total of 66 melanomas were reported in groups receiving the experimental drug and 86 in groups receiving placebo or other control therapies. For statin trials this translated to an odds ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.44) and for fibrate trials an odds ratio of 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.19 to 1.82). Subgroup analyses failed to show statistically significant differences in melanoma outcomes by gender, melanoma occurrence after two years of participation in trial, stage or histology, or trial funding. Subgroup analysis by type of fibrate or statin also failed to show statistically significant differences, except for the statin subgroup analysis which showed reduced melanoma incidence for lovastatin, based on one trial only (odds ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.99). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The melanoma outcomes data collected in this review of RCTs of statins and fibrates does not exclude the possibility that these drugs prevent melanoma. There was a 10% and 42% reduction for participants on statins and fibrates, respectively, however these results were not statistically significant. Until further evidence is established, limiting exposure to ultraviolet radiation remains the most effective way to reduce the risk of melanoma.