A comparison of information retention at an initial orthodontic consultation.
(25/547)
The exchange of information is an everyday part of orthodontic treatment. However, the amount of information that is understood and retained, by patients and their parents, is not known. There has been very little research in the area of information retention in dentistry. This has implications with the demands for improved provision of information for patients. This questionnaire-based study, compared the effectiveness of written, verbal, and visual methods of providing orthodontic information. It assessed the retention of this information, by patients and parents, in both the short- and long-term. Twenty-eight patients and their parents, were allocated alternately into one of three groups, receiving written, verbal, or visual information. Short-term retention of knowledge was assessed 10-15 minutes after receiving the information and long-term retention rated by a second questionnaire mailed 8 weeks later. Overall, little difference was found between the three methods. The findings suggested that verbal information should not be given to patients unless supplemented by written and/or visual information, and that parents were more attentive to verbal instructions than their children. (+info)
Writing for publication--a guide for new authors.
(26/547)
Health care practitioners who are inexperienced in writing for publication are sometimes daunted by the publication process and fail to submit their work on quality improvement to a journal. New authors can acquire experience in writing a paper by working through a systematic thought process that includes consideration of what journal readers and editors want and if the work is ready for publication. The most important part of writing a paper is to think through the key ideas and messages for readers and then to organize the ideas into a logical structure. Writing clear answers to 10 key questions may be one way to start the process. (+info)
Hematology grants workshop-2001.
(27/547)
This year the Hematology Grants Workshop, chaired by Dr. Todd, includes a comprehensive listing of available National Institutes of Health, Department of Veterans Affairs, and non-federal grants applicable to fellows and junior faculty as well as to established investigators. In Section II, Dr. Miller discusses the essential principles of successful grant writing with a special emphasis on the young investigator. He highlights the best strategies to take and the common mistakes to avoid. In Section III, Dr. Silverstein outlines the structure of the current NIH Integrated Review Group (IRG) system and the study sections of the most relevance to hematology. He traces the path that a grant takes from review to funding including the way in which grants are reviewed at NIH Study Section Meetings and provides advice in the preparation of revised applications. (+info)
Suggested guidelines for articles about botanical dietary supplements.
(28/547)
Recently, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN) began reviewing articles about dietary supplements. The purpose of this commentary is to provide guidelines to authors and reviewers for articles on one category of supplement ingredients, botanicals. The botanicals in the studies published by the AJCN tend to fall into 1 of 2 groups: 1) plants as foods containing nonessential bioactive constituents that may provide health benefits beyond basic nutrition, and 2) plants as herbs, specifically those used as phytomedicines. Research in these areas is relevant to clinical nutrition, but both topics represent relatively new territory to many AJCN reviewers, readers, and contributors. Although studies of botanicals are unique in many respects, the research should be evaluated with the same basic criteria applied to other types of investigations. For example, a study cannot be evaluated or replicated unless the test materials are properly identified and characterized. Investigators must provide an accurate and complete description of the botanical test material regardless of whether it is a finished product, commercial ingredient, extract, or single chemical constituent. For herbal preparations, investigators are advised to follow the criteria used by researchers in the field of pharmacognosy. Finally, the quality of research related to botanical dietary supplements would be improved and cross-study comparisons facilitated if standard reference materials and certified methods of analysis were more broadly available. (+info)
Predicting performance on the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada internal medicine written examination.
(29/547)
BACKGROUND: Although the written component of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC)internal medicine examination is important for obtaining licensure and certification as a specialist, no methods exist to predict a candidate's performance on the examination. METHOD: We obtained data from 5 Canadian universities from 1988 to 1998 in order to compare raw scores from the American Internal Medicine In-Training Examination (AIMI-TE) with raw scores and outcomes (pass or fail) of the written component of the RCPSC internal medicine examination. RESULTS: Mean scores on the AIMI-TE correlated well with scores on the RCPSC internal medicine written examination for all postgraduate years (r = 0.62, r = 0.55 and r = 0.65 for postgraduate years 1, 2 and 3 respectively). Scores above the 50th percentile on the AIMI-TE w/ere predictive of a low failure rate (< 1.5%) on the RCPSC internal medicine written examination, whereas scores at or below the 10th percentile were associated with a high failure rate (about 24%). INTERPRETATION: Candidates who are eligible to take the written component of the RCPSC certification examination in internal medicine can use the AIMI-TE to predict their performance on the Canadian examination. The AIMI-TE is a useful test for residents in all levels of training, because the examination scores have a strong relation to expected performance on the Canadian examination for each year of postgraduate training. (+info)
How to write an evidence-based clinical review article.
(30/547)
Traditional clinical review articles, also known as updates, differ from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Updates selectively review the medical literature while discussing a topic broadly. Non-quantitative systematic reviews comprehensively examine the medical literature, seeking to identify and synthesize all relevant information to formulate the best approach to diagnosis or treatment. Meta-analyses (quantitative systematic reviews) seek to answer a focused clinical question, using rigorous statistical analysis of pooled research studies. This article presents guidelines for writing an evidence-based clinical review article for American Family Physician. First, the topic should be of common interest and relevance to family practice. Include a table of the continuing medical education objectives of the review. State how the literature search was done and include several sources of evidence-based reviews, such as the Cochrane Collaboration, BMJ's Clinical Evidence, or the InfoRetriever Web site. Where possible, use evidence based on clinical outcomes relating to morbidity, mortality, or quality of life, and studies of primary care populations. In articles submitted to American Family Physician, rate the level of evidence for key recommendations according to the following scale: level A (randomized controlled trial [RCT], meta-analysis); level B (other evidence); level C (consensus/expert opinion). Finally, provide a table of key summary points. (+info)
Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing.
(31/547)
Many undergraduate and graduate students understand neither the process of scientific writing nor the significance of peer review. In response, some instructors have created writing assignments that teach or mimic parts of the scientific publishing process. However, none fully reproduced peer review and revision of papers together with the writing and publishing process from research to final, accepted draft. In addition, most have been instituted at the graduate rather than undergraduate level. We present a detailed method for teaching undergraduate students the full scientific publishing process, including anonymous peer review, during the process of writing a "term paper." The result is a review article in the format for submission to a major scientific journal. This method has been implemented in the course Cell and Molecular Biology for Engineers at the University of Virginia. Use of this method resulted in improved grades, much higher quality in the final manuscript, greater objectivity in grading, and improved understanding of the importance of peer review. (+info)
Hanja alexia with agraphia after left posterior inferior temporal lobe infarction: a case study.
(32/547)
Korean written language is composed of ideogram (Hanja) and phonogram (Hangul), as Japanese consists of Kanji (ideogram) and Kana (phonogram). Dissociation between ideogram and phonogram impairment after brain injury has been reported in Japanese, but few in Korean. We report a 64-yr-old right-handed man who showed alexia with agraphia in Hanja but preserved Hangul reading and writing after a left posterior inferior temporal lobe infarction. Interestingly, the patient was an expert in Hanja; he had been a Hanja calligrapher over 40 yr. However, when presented with 65 basic Chinese letters that are taught in elementary school, his responses were slow both in reading (6.3 sec/letter) and writing (8.8 sec/letter). The rate of correct response was 81.5% (53 out of 65 letters) both in reading and writing. The patient's performances were beyond mean-2SD of those of six age-, sex-, and education-matched controls who correctly read 64.7 out of 65 and wrote 62.5 out of 65 letters with a much shorter reaction time (1.3 sec/letter for reading and 4.0 sec/letter for writing). These findings support the notion that ideogram and phonogram can be mediated in different brain regions and Hanja alexia with agraphia in Korean patients can be associated with a left posterior inferior temporal lesion. (+info)