Background: This study aims to identify the preferred sources for acquiring knowledge about COVID-19 and to evaluate basic knowledge on critical scientific literature appraisal in students from medical schools located in Spanish speaking countries in Latin America. Methods: We designed an online survey of 15 closed-ended questions related to demographics, preferred resources for COVID-19 training, and items to assess critical appraisal skills. A snowball method was used for sampling. We conducted a descriptive analysis and Chi-squared tests to compare the proportion of correct identification of the concept of a preprint and a predatory journal when considering a) self-perceived level of knowledge, b) public vs private school, c) inclusion of a scientific literature appraisal subject in the curriculum, and d) progress in medical school. Results: Our sample included 770 valid responses, out of which most of the participants included were from Mexico (n=283, 36.8%) and Ecuador (n=229, 29.7%). Participants preferred using evidence-based clinical resources (EBCRs) to learn more about COVID-19 (n=182, 23.6%). The preferred study design was case report/series (n=218, 28.1%). We found that only 265 participants correctly identified the concept of a preprint (34.4%), while 243 students (31.6%) correctly identified the characteristics of a predatory journal. We found no significant differences in the proportion of correct answers regardless of the self-perceived level of knowledge, progress in medical school, or scientific literature critical appraisal classes. Conclusion: This study is novel in its approach of identifying sources of knowledge used by Latin American medical students and provides insights into the need to reinforce training in critical appraisal of scientific literature during medical school.
Introducción: Debido a la pandemia por COVID-19, se implementó en México la Jornada Nacional de Sana Distancia para prevenir los contagios. Objetivo: Conocer el nivel de adherencia y conocimiento sobre las medidas preventivas de COVID-19 establecidas por el gobierno de México en Mérida, Yucatán. Material y métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional, descriptivo, transversal con una encuesta en el grupo de Facebook “Que todo Mérida se entere” del 20 al 30 de abril de 2021. Resultados: De 173 registros, 157 fueron válidos, en su mayoría de mujeres (94). Se obtuvo un nivel de adherencia alto en 122 participantes y medio en 35, sin nivel bajo; se registró un nivel de conocimiento alto en 84 participantes, medio en 65 y bajo en 8. No se encontró asociación estadísticamente significativa con la prueba de Chi cuadrado entre nivel de conocimiento-infección por COVID-19 (p= 0.4429), nivel de adherencia-infección por COVID-19 (p= 0.078), nivel de conocimiento-contacto con familiar con COVID-19 (p=0.1548) y nivel de adherencia-contacto con familiar con COVID-19 (p=0.1318). Conclusiones: Es necesario evaluar otros factores que podrían influir en la alta incidencia de COVID-19, así como las razones de que aun con conocimiento medio o bajo se tiene un nivel de adherencia alto.
Background: This study aims to identify the preferred sources for acquiring knowledge about COVID-19 and to evaluate basic knowledge on critical scientific literature appraisal in students from medical schools located in Spanish speaking countries in Latin America. Methods: We designed an online survey of 15 closed-ended questions related to demographics, preferred resources for COVID-19 training, and items to assess critical appraisal skills. A snowball method was used for sampling. We conducted a descriptive analysis and Chi-squared tests to compare the proportion of correct identification of the concept of a preprint and a predatory journal when considering a) self-perceived level of knowledge, b) public vs private school, c) inclusion of a scientific literature appraisal subject in the curriculum, and d) progress in medical school. Results: Our sample included 770 valid responses, out of which most of the participants included were from Mexico (n=283, 36.8%) and Ecuador (n=229, 29.7%). Participants preferred using evidence-based clinical resources (EBCRs) to learn more about COVID-19 (n=182, 23.6%). The preferred study design was case report/series (n=218, 28.1%). We found that only 265 participants correctly identified the concept of a preprint (34.4%), while 243 students (31.6%) correctly identified the characteristics of a predatory journal. We found no significant differences in the proportion of correct answers regardless of the self-perceived level of knowledge, progress in medical school, or scientific literature critical appraisal classes. Conclusion: This study is novel in its approach of identifying sources of knowledge used by Latin American medical students and provides insights into the need to reinforce training in critical appraisal of scientific literature during medical school.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.