推动和建立新的前沿:2015-2023年《学生管理诊所杂志》发表模式考察

Oliver T Nguyen, Joseph C Rumenapp, David Lee, Hardik Patel, Kevin Chen, Kendall Major
{"title":"推动和建立新的前沿:2015-2023年《学生管理诊所杂志》发表模式考察","authors":"Oliver T Nguyen, Joseph C Rumenapp, David Lee, Hardik Patel, Kevin Chen, Kendall Major","doi":"10.59586/jsrc.v10i1.483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The Journal of Student-Run Clinics (JSRC) has published research from student-run clinics (SRCs) for almost ten years. However, to date, no study has aimed to summarize publishing trends observed at JSRC. Thus, we aimed to characterize these JSRC publications in order to identify patterns in published research topics, identify research gaps, and inform future research priorities. \nMethods: We adapted scoping review methodology and included all articles published in the JSRC from 2015 to 2023. For each article, we assessed for publication year, article type, university affiliated with the SRC, region of the United States (US) the SRC is located in, disease focus, outcomes studied, data collection methods used, sample size, interventions involved, analytic approaches used, and concept domains involved. Concept domains were determined using a taxonomy from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to identify patterns in topical content from published articles. \nResults: This review included 167 articles. Over time, we observed an increasing trend of overall publication volume (e.g., 5 in 2015 vs 23 in 2023). Studies typically occurred in the primary care context with fewer studies in other outpatient specialties (e.g., ophthalmology, physical therapy). The most common domains were workforce (21.3%), workflows (17.4%) and practice/quality improvement (17.4%). Empirical studies typically used surveys (52.1%) or chart reviews of patient records (38.5%) for data sources. Less than half of the studies aimed to assess the impact of an intervention. \nConclusion: This review highlighted significant strides made on research in SRCs. Future studies reporting intervention may benefit from adhering to established reporting guidelines. Additional studies are needed across several areas, including understanding the impact of non-primary care SRCs, assessing quality of care and clinical outcomes, and employing qualitative and/or mixed methods approaches when studying interventions’ impact on patients and volunteers.","PeriodicalId":73958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of student-run clinics","volume":"19 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pushing and Establishing New Frontiers: An Examination of Publication Patterns From 2015-2023 in the Journal of Student-Run Clinics\",\"authors\":\"Oliver T Nguyen, Joseph C Rumenapp, David Lee, Hardik Patel, Kevin Chen, Kendall Major\",\"doi\":\"10.59586/jsrc.v10i1.483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The Journal of Student-Run Clinics (JSRC) has published research from student-run clinics (SRCs) for almost ten years. However, to date, no study has aimed to summarize publishing trends observed at JSRC. Thus, we aimed to characterize these JSRC publications in order to identify patterns in published research topics, identify research gaps, and inform future research priorities. \\nMethods: We adapted scoping review methodology and included all articles published in the JSRC from 2015 to 2023. For each article, we assessed for publication year, article type, university affiliated with the SRC, region of the United States (US) the SRC is located in, disease focus, outcomes studied, data collection methods used, sample size, interventions involved, analytic approaches used, and concept domains involved. Concept domains were determined using a taxonomy from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to identify patterns in topical content from published articles. \\nResults: This review included 167 articles. Over time, we observed an increasing trend of overall publication volume (e.g., 5 in 2015 vs 23 in 2023). Studies typically occurred in the primary care context with fewer studies in other outpatient specialties (e.g., ophthalmology, physical therapy). The most common domains were workforce (21.3%), workflows (17.4%) and practice/quality improvement (17.4%). Empirical studies typically used surveys (52.1%) or chart reviews of patient records (38.5%) for data sources. Less than half of the studies aimed to assess the impact of an intervention. \\nConclusion: This review highlighted significant strides made on research in SRCs. Future studies reporting intervention may benefit from adhering to established reporting guidelines. Additional studies are needed across several areas, including understanding the impact of non-primary care SRCs, assessing quality of care and clinical outcomes, and employing qualitative and/or mixed methods approaches when studying interventions’ impact on patients and volunteers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of student-run clinics\",\"volume\":\"19 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of student-run clinics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v10i1.483\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of student-run clinics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59586/jsrc.v10i1.483","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:学生自办诊所期刊》(JSRC)发表学生自办诊所(SRC)的研究成果已有近十年的历史。然而,迄今为止,还没有一项研究旨在总结在《学生自办诊所杂志》上观察到的发表趋势。因此,我们的目的是对这些JSRC出版物进行特征描述,以确定发表的研究课题的模式,找出研究差距,并为未来的研究重点提供信息。方法:我们采用了范围综述方法,收录了2015年至2023年在JSRC发表的所有文章。我们对每篇文章的发表年份、文章类型、SRC所属大学、SRC所在的美国地区、疾病重点、研究结果、使用的数据收集方法、样本大小、涉及的干预措施、使用的分析方法以及涉及的概念域进行了评估。概念域是通过医疗保健研究与质量机构(AHRQ)的分类法确定的,目的是从发表的文章中找出主题内容的模式。结果:本综述包括 167 篇文章。随着时间的推移,我们观察到总体发表量呈上升趋势(例如,2015 年为 5 篇,2023 年为 23 篇)。研究通常发生在初级保健领域,其他门诊专科(如眼科、理疗科)的研究较少。最常见的领域是劳动力(21.3%)、工作流程(17.4%)和实践/质量改进(17.4%)。经验性研究通常使用调查(52.1%)或病历审查(38.5%)作为数据来源。只有不到一半的研究旨在评估干预措施的影响。结论本综述强调了 SRC 研究取得的重大进展。未来报告干预措施的研究可能会受益于遵守既定的报告指南。还需要在多个领域开展更多研究,包括了解非初级护理 SRC 的影响、评估护理质量和临床结果,以及在研究干预措施对患者和志愿者的影响时采用定性和/或混合方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Pushing and Establishing New Frontiers: An Examination of Publication Patterns From 2015-2023 in the Journal of Student-Run Clinics
Background: The Journal of Student-Run Clinics (JSRC) has published research from student-run clinics (SRCs) for almost ten years. However, to date, no study has aimed to summarize publishing trends observed at JSRC. Thus, we aimed to characterize these JSRC publications in order to identify patterns in published research topics, identify research gaps, and inform future research priorities. Methods: We adapted scoping review methodology and included all articles published in the JSRC from 2015 to 2023. For each article, we assessed for publication year, article type, university affiliated with the SRC, region of the United States (US) the SRC is located in, disease focus, outcomes studied, data collection methods used, sample size, interventions involved, analytic approaches used, and concept domains involved. Concept domains were determined using a taxonomy from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to identify patterns in topical content from published articles. Results: This review included 167 articles. Over time, we observed an increasing trend of overall publication volume (e.g., 5 in 2015 vs 23 in 2023). Studies typically occurred in the primary care context with fewer studies in other outpatient specialties (e.g., ophthalmology, physical therapy). The most common domains were workforce (21.3%), workflows (17.4%) and practice/quality improvement (17.4%). Empirical studies typically used surveys (52.1%) or chart reviews of patient records (38.5%) for data sources. Less than half of the studies aimed to assess the impact of an intervention. Conclusion: This review highlighted significant strides made on research in SRCs. Future studies reporting intervention may benefit from adhering to established reporting guidelines. Additional studies are needed across several areas, including understanding the impact of non-primary care SRCs, assessing quality of care and clinical outcomes, and employing qualitative and/or mixed methods approaches when studying interventions’ impact on patients and volunteers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Otolaryngology in Medical Education: Hands-on Training at an SRFC Community Site Improves Medical Student Knowledge and Skills Improving Documentation of and Access to Diabetic Retinopathy Screening at a Student-Run Free Clinic Success and Challenges of Establishing a Teledermatology Pilot Service at a Student-Run Clinic Pushing and Establishing New Frontiers: An Examination of Publication Patterns From 2015-2023 in the Journal of Student-Run Clinics Standardization of Clinic Flow to Improve Patient Experience in a Student-Run Free Clinic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1