INTRODUCTION

Since February 2007, a lecture and team-based learning (TBL) module on research and publication ethics has been offered for new faculty as part of the workshop for incoming faculty at the College of Medicine, Hallym University. During the workshop, it became apparent that young faculty members rarely had an opportunity to learn about these issues during their training period as residents or fellows. Incredibly, the most frequently occurring issue was the definition of authorship. Once this problem was identified, the TBL course continued to be offered for incoming faculty. Discussions among tutors led to the observation that it would be better for graduate students, who are deeply involved in research and publication, to be exposed to this information. Therefore, during a graduate course titled Methods of Medical Research, 4 hr were allocated to the ethics of research and publication, 2 hr on each of two separate days with a 14-day interval between them, in October and November 2007. In this article, the content of the TBL ethics course will be described and students’ evaluations will be examined as a basis for improving the class.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The content of the course focused on basic issues involved in research and publication ethics and was developed by four tutors, including the author, who are faculty members of the College of Medicine, Hallym University. The tutors discussed the contents via the Internet and agreed on the topics to be addressed in the graduate course. The textbook for the course was also written by the four tutors.

To gather feedback from the students, a survey using a series of 5-point Likert-scale questions was administered at the end of the 4-hr course. Nineteen students responded to the survey. Some students were physicians working in the hospital or local clinics, and the others were full-time students in basic medicine. The questionnaire consisted of four categories: general course content (7 items), attitudes toward research and publication ethics (6 items), the TBL format (6 items), and an open-ended question about the course (1 item). The items in each category are described in Table 1, 2, and 3. The answers to the open-ended question, when students could discuss the course freely, are summarized below.

RESULTS

The nine topics covered in the textbook were as follows: Introduction to Research Ethics, Research Misconduct, Ethics in Clinical Research, Conflict of Interest, Copyright Protection, Plagiarism, Authorship, Duplicate Publication, and Publication Ethics. The textbook was distributed to students 2 weeks prior to the first ethics segment of the course. During the TBL, assessments of individual and group readiness and of the application of course material were conducted. Assessment items consisted of real cases that have occurred in Korea, providing students with an opportunity to seek solutions in situations that might have some personal meaning [1]. The results are summarized in Table 1, 2, and 3. Mean and median responses to each item and percentage of strongly positive responses (≥4) to each item are shown.

Results indicated that students were generally satisfied with the contents of the course. The most positive response affirmed the necessity of learning the material covered in the class. Students also reported satisfaction with the textbook and with the level of information covered in the book. In contrast, students were relatively dissatisfied with the fast pace of the course, the amount of material covered, and the time allocated for the material, probably due to the extensive amount of information covered in the textbook (Table 1). Students’ responses also reflected positive attitudes about research and publication ethics. This finding may also be taken as a positive comment about the students. Some students expressed concern as to whether their preceptor had been involved in ethical misconduct (Table 2). They were generally satisfied with the communication with a tutor provided by the TBL format. Most students showed positive responses to the subject matter as well as to the TBL format. Students reported an increase in workload due to preparation for the class and to the TBL format. In addition, class participation itself may have been viewed as an increased burden, as students were expected to participate in group discussion (Table 3). Responses to the open-ended question can be summarized as follows: It was difficult to understand research ethics; The time allotted for the class was too short; I gained new knowledge; The TBL format was useful; A system to preserve research and publication ethics is necessary; Concerns that arose while writing the class paper will arise again; This course should also be implemented in the residency program at the hospital.

DISCUSSION

Keeping up with the rapid pace of the course may be too hard for some students when it is offered in such a short period, and some concepts might be difficult for students at this level. Some students reported that preparing for and participating in this course involved a heavier workload than other courses. This observation may in part reflect a lack of familiarity with TBL classes. TBL has been applied to very few classes in the graduate school of the College of Medicine, Hallym University. Although some students complained of difficulties in preparing for and participating in the class and problems in understanding the contents, most students were very satisfied not only with the contents but also with the TBL format of this course.

Finding instances of the implementation of TBL in courses on research and/or publication ethics at the graduate level is difficult, although numerous instances of TBL can be found in undergraduate medical school courses. A study on TBL in an anatomy and embryology course in the United States suggested that TBL may be most beneficial for at-risk students, as this format ensures that they receive encouragement to study consistently and are provided regular feedback on their preparedness and given the opportunity to develop higher reasoning skills [2]. TBL has been found to be an effective active teaching method for teaching dermatopathology in Korea [3]. Another report indicated that a team-based continuing medical education course led to significant gains in participants’ knowledge in Germany [4]. Since the need for knowledge of and for positive attitudes toward medical practice are essential in medical research [5], TBL may be a good learning tool for addressing research and publication ethics in the classroom and in the field. To ensure good ethical practices among the new generation of medical doctors, the TBL course on ethical issues should be implemented in the residency training program of every training hospital as well as in graduate programs.

Acknowledgments

References

• 1. Kim SY, Hahm CK, Bae CW, Cho HM. Duplicate publications in Korean medical journals. Indexed in KoreaMed. J Korean Med Sci 2008;23:131-3. ArticlePubMedPMC
• 2. Nieder GL, Parmelee DX, Stolfi A, Hudes PD. Team-based learning in a medical gross anatomy and embryology course. Clin Anat 2005;18:56-63. ArticlePubMed
• 3. Han HS, Lee R, Sohn IS, Lee JM, Lee KY. A study on students’ academic achievement and perception of team-based learning during a medical dermatopathology lecture. Korean J Med Educ 2007;19:257-63. Article
• 4. Kuhne-Eversmann L, Eversmann T, Fischer MR. Team- and case-based learning to activate participants and enhance knowledge: an evaluation of seminars in Germany. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2008;28:165-71. ArticlePubMed
• 5. Kim OJ, Park BJ, Sohn DR, Lee SM, Shin SG. Current status of institutional review boards in Korea: constitution, operation, and policy for protection of human research participants. J Korean Med Sci 2003;18:3-10. ArticlePubMedPMC

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Pedagogic Strategies and Contents in Medical Writing/Publishing Education: A Comprehensive Systematic Survey
  Behrooz Astaneh, Ream Abdullah, Vala Astaneh, Sana Gupta, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, Mitchell A. H. Levine, Gordon Guaytt
  European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education.2024; 14(9): 2491.     CrossRef
• Team-based Learning: Enhancing Academic Performance of Psychology Students
  Nadia Rania, Stefania Rebora, Laura Migliorini
  Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.2015; 174: 946.     CrossRef
• Team-Based Learning Instruction for Responsible Conduct of Research Positively Impacts Ethical Decision-Making
  Wayne T. McCormack, Cynthia W. Garvan
  Accountability in Research.2014; 21(1): 34.     CrossRef
• Team-Based Learning in Pharmacy Education
  William Ofstad, Lane J. Brunner
  American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.2013; 77(4): 70.     CrossRef
• Perspective
  Paul Haidet, Ruth E. Levine, Dean X. Parmelee, Sheila Crow, Frances Kennedy, P. Adam Kelly, Linda Perkowski, Larry Michaelsen, Boyd F. Richards
  Academic Medicine.2012; 87(3): 292.     CrossRef
• Evaluation of a Team-Based Learning Tutor Training Workshop on Research and Publication Ethics by Faculty and Staff Participants
  Young-Su Ju
  Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2010; 6: 5.     CrossRef