Clinical Research Primer for Medical Students: Behind the Curtain, a Framework on Peer Review for Trainees.

IF 0.6 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Neurological Surgery Reports Pub Date : 2025-03-31 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2554-2357
Taylor Niznik, Sherwin A Tavakol, Tressie Stephens, Andrew M Bauer, Ian F Dunn, Christopher S Graffeo
{"title":"Clinical Research Primer for Medical Students: Behind the Curtain, a Framework on Peer Review for Trainees.","authors":"Taylor Niznik, Sherwin A Tavakol, Tressie Stephens, Andrew M Bauer, Ian F Dunn, Christopher S Graffeo","doi":"10.1055/a-2554-2357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Academic scholarship is an increasingly emphasized component of undergraduate medical education (UME), in particular since the USMLE Step 1 examination transitioned to a pass/fail grading scheme in 2022. Peer review is a cornerstone of academic publishing, but essentially no formal training exists at the UME or graduate medical education levels to prepare trainees for participation in the process as authors or reviewers. This clinical research primer presents an introductory set of guidelines and pearls to empower trainee participation in the peer-review process as both authors and reviewers. We outline a systematic approach to manuscript evaluation and recommend a nonlinear strategy that begins with the Abstract and Methods, followed by Figures, Tables, and Results, concluding with the Discussion. This framework includes guidelines for constructing effective reviews, from initial summary and overall recommendations to specific, actionable comments. Participation in peer review can also advance trainees' scholarly development by exposing gaps in literature that inspire new research questions and developing their ability to anticipate and address potential reviewer critiques in their own manuscript preparation. While initial implementation requires close supervision from experienced mentors, this structured approach streamlines the peer-review learning process and provides substantial benefits for all participants in academic publishing, enhancing both mentorship relationships and scholarly development.</p>","PeriodicalId":44256,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurological Surgery Reports","volume":"86 1","pages":"e45-e49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11957855/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurological Surgery Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2554-2357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Academic scholarship is an increasingly emphasized component of undergraduate medical education (UME), in particular since the USMLE Step 1 examination transitioned to a pass/fail grading scheme in 2022. Peer review is a cornerstone of academic publishing, but essentially no formal training exists at the UME or graduate medical education levels to prepare trainees for participation in the process as authors or reviewers. This clinical research primer presents an introductory set of guidelines and pearls to empower trainee participation in the peer-review process as both authors and reviewers. We outline a systematic approach to manuscript evaluation and recommend a nonlinear strategy that begins with the Abstract and Methods, followed by Figures, Tables, and Results, concluding with the Discussion. This framework includes guidelines for constructing effective reviews, from initial summary and overall recommendations to specific, actionable comments. Participation in peer review can also advance trainees' scholarly development by exposing gaps in literature that inspire new research questions and developing their ability to anticipate and address potential reviewer critiques in their own manuscript preparation. While initial implementation requires close supervision from experienced mentors, this structured approach streamlines the peer-review learning process and provides substantial benefits for all participants in academic publishing, enhancing both mentorship relationships and scholarly development.

医学生临床研究入门:幕后,实习生同行评议框架。
学术奖学金是本科医学教育(UME)中越来越受重视的组成部分,特别是自2022年USMLE第一步考试过渡到及格/不及格评分制度以来。同行评议是学术出版的基石,但在UME或研究生医学教育层面,基本上没有正式的培训,使受训者能够以作者或审稿人的身份参与这一过程。本临床研究入门介绍了一套入门指南和珍珠,以授权学员参与同行评审过程的作者和审稿人。我们概述了一种系统的手稿评估方法,并推荐一种非线性策略,从摘要和方法开始,然后是图、表和结果,最后是讨论。该框架包括构建有效审查的指导方针,从最初的摘要和总体建议到具体的、可操作的评论。参与同行评议还可以通过揭示文献中的空白来促进学员的学术发展,从而激发新的研究问题,并发展他们在自己的手稿准备过程中预测和解决潜在审稿人批评的能力。虽然最初的实施需要经验丰富的导师的密切监督,但这种结构化的方法简化了同行评审的学习过程,并为学术出版的所有参与者提供了实质性的好处,增强了师徒关系和学术发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信