The Medical Journal Club - A Tool for Knowledge Refinement and Transfer in Healthcare

2011 ◽  
pp. 176-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kahild S. Khan ◽  
Lucas M. Bachmann ◽  
Johann Steurer

The information base for healthcare is rapidly expanding. There are more than 20,000 biomedical journals. Approximately 17,000 new biomedical books were published in 1990, and these were projected to increase by annually up to 7% (Sackett et al., 1996; Siegel, Cummings, & Woodsmall, 1990). With such an exponential increase in information, there is a need for effective and efficient strategies to keep up-to-date with clinically relevant new knowledge. Without current best evidence, medical practice risks becoming out-of-date, to the detriment of patients.

2003 ◽  
Vol 183 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Tyrer

The challenges for scientific journals at the beginning of 21st century are exciting but formidable. In addition to reporting faithfully new knowledge and new ideas, each journal, or at least all those aiming for a general readership, has to cater for a potentially huge lay readership waiting at the internet portals, a hungry press eager for juicy titbits, and core readers who, while impressed to some extent by weighty contributions to knowledge, are also looking for lighter material that is both informative and entertaining. In the past this type of content was frowned on as mere journalism, fluff of short-term appeal but no real substance. The lighter approach was pioneered by Michael O'Donnell as editor of World Medicine in the 1970s, who introduced a brand of racy articles, debates and controversial issues in a tone of amusing and irreverent iconoclasm. At this time it was dismissed as a comic by some of the learned journals but its popularity ensured that in subsequent years its critics quietly followed suit, as any current reader of the British Medical Journal and the Lancet will testify.


2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
International Committee Of Medical Journal Editors

These statements, which are published by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in conjunction with the Vancouver standards, cover sorne of the legal, ethical, and practical aspects of the publication of research papers, and of the comments generated by them, in biomedical journals. Pollowing a definition of what constitutes a peer-reviewed journal, the roles of journal owners and editors are described, along with those of members of an editorial board, and procedural norms are set forth in connection with conflicts of interests, retractions or corrections, fraud, and breaches of confidentiality. Arnong the last topics explored are the problems involved in the dissemination of research results by the popular media, the handling of advertising within the journal, and the simultaneous acceptance of manuscripts whose authors have arrived at opposite conclusions regarding the results of a particular study.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aysha Nijamudeen ◽  
Tricia Tay

This is a summary of journal club-cum-teaching series organised by the Manchester Medical Journal to teach students critical appraisal skills.


Author(s):  
Donald W. Winnicott

A letter from Winnicott to the British Medical Journal stating his views that leucotomy is the “worst honest error” to emerge in recent medical practice. He believes that the increased use of surgery, instead of psychotherapy, has led mentally ill patients to fear being subjected to the procedure and that doctors are using it, and electroshock therapy, as quick fixes to complex mental problems.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-29
Author(s):  
Rafael Vargas

In this work, it is analysed how the medical practice is imbued with Cartesian rational thought as well as empiricist thought and it is stated that medicine is an art and is science. It is proposed that the object of knowledge of the medical practice is not the concept of disease but health. It is from the concept of health and normality that medical taxonomy labels individuals as sick. This taxonomy is frequently re-evaluated and reorganized by scientific societies. This sometimes occurs according to new knowledge, but this categorization may also be questioned due to direct intervention or indirect pressure related to interests, especially economic, that are sometimes not clearly visible. Accordingly, an ongoing discussion is needed to keep the medical practice neutral against struggles of interest derived from the health industry. These topics must be considered and debated in medical schools including undergraduate and postgraduate programs.


Author(s):  
Sue Newell

Knowledge integration is a process whereby several individuals share and combine their information to collectively create new knowledge (Okhuysen & Eisenhardt, 2002). Here we are interested in knowledge integration in the context of innovation project teams tasked with developing a new product or organizational practice. Knowledge integration is crucial in relation to innovation, since innovation depends on the generation of new ideas (new knowledge) that leads to the development of new products or organizational practices. Knowledge integration, rather than simply knowledge per se, is important for innovation because it is not simply the possession of new knowledge that will create success in terms of improved practice or new products, but rather, the ability to integrate knowledge across groups and organizations (Gibbons et al., 1994). This is especially the case in relation to radical innovation, which depends on involvement of an increasingly dispersed range of professional groups and organizations (Powell, Koput, & Smith-Doerr, 1996). For example, in the medical domain there are an increasing number of breakthroughs in scientific and technical knowledge that could drastically change medical practice. Achieving such breakthroughs, however, does not necessarily result in performance improvements in medical practice. Major pharmaceutical companies take, on average, 11 years and a minimum of one-third of $1 billion to bring a drug to market, and over 90% of development processes fail (CMR International, 2000). Similarly, in relation to major transformational IT innovation projects in organizations, many do not just fall short of meeting cost, functionality, and scheduling targets, but actually fail outright (Johnson, 1995).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document