{"title":"Peer Learning Has Double Effects in Clinical Research Education: A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Hiro Nakao, Osamu Nomura, Chie Nagata, Akira Ishiguro","doi":"10.1155/2024/5513079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Peer learning has been recognized for its effectiveness in health professional education. However, its effects on clinical research education are not clear and were explored qualitatively in this study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The peer-learning method was implemented in a clinical research education seminar for early-career physicians at a children's and mothers' hospital in 2019. We conducted semistructured interviews with participants about peer-learning experience and qualitatively analyzed verbatim transcripts using Engeström's \"activity theory\" framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From framework analysis, learning processes were extracted mainly in four domains, namely, (a) instrument and its usage: research design and its match with research question, (b) outcome: research result, (c) community: seminar, and (d) division of labor: roles of participants and staff.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this report of a peer-learning trial in postgraduate clinical research education, the following two pathways of peer-learning effects were abstracted. The indirect pathway was the presentations by experienced participants providing concrete examples of research processes. The direct pathway was the questions from experienced participants to beginners about specific and concrete questions. There were also two points to consider in peer learning in clinical research education: gaps in premise knowledge and beginners' frustration about expected outcomes. We believe that these extracted pathways and points imply the significance and considerations for continuing the peer-learning trial in clinical research education. Future tasks are to promote clinical research education with a view to the learning effects, not only on individuals, but also on groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":51591,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pediatrics","volume":"2024 ","pages":"5513079"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10838209/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/5513079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Peer learning has been recognized for its effectiveness in health professional education. However, its effects on clinical research education are not clear and were explored qualitatively in this study.
Methods: The peer-learning method was implemented in a clinical research education seminar for early-career physicians at a children's and mothers' hospital in 2019. We conducted semistructured interviews with participants about peer-learning experience and qualitatively analyzed verbatim transcripts using Engeström's "activity theory" framework.
Results: From framework analysis, learning processes were extracted mainly in four domains, namely, (a) instrument and its usage: research design and its match with research question, (b) outcome: research result, (c) community: seminar, and (d) division of labor: roles of participants and staff.
Conclusions: In this report of a peer-learning trial in postgraduate clinical research education, the following two pathways of peer-learning effects were abstracted. The indirect pathway was the presentations by experienced participants providing concrete examples of research processes. The direct pathway was the questions from experienced participants to beginners about specific and concrete questions. There were also two points to consider in peer learning in clinical research education: gaps in premise knowledge and beginners' frustration about expected outcomes. We believe that these extracted pathways and points imply the significance and considerations for continuing the peer-learning trial in clinical research education. Future tasks are to promote clinical research education with a view to the learning effects, not only on individuals, but also on groups.
期刊介绍:
International Journal of Pediatrics is a peer-reviewed, open access journal that publishes original researcharticles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of pediatric research. The journal accepts submissions presented as an original article, short communication, case report, review article, systematic review, or letter to the editor.