Scholarlink

Introduction <p>In light of the widespread availability of scientific research, researchers must acquire critical and analytical skills related to different research methodologies to identify useful ones. This ability supports their academic careers by enabling them to generate valid evidence and apply research methodologies effectively. These skills are collectively referred to as meta-research skills.</p> Objective <p>The study aimed to assess the skills of novice researchers in the College of Health Sciences regarding meta-research and to evaluate the effectiveness of a workshop conducted to enhance these skills.</p> Methods <p>Students from the Faculty of Health Sciences with ongoing research projects were invited to attend a workshop on meta-research skills. The workshop evaluation tool consisted of the 10 items developed based on the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) and a previous literature review, using a standardized one-point scoring system. Before the workshop, a questionnaire was distributed to assess their abilities in research analysis and deduction. Following the workshop, the same questionnaire was administered to evaluate any improvement in their responses. A total of 84 students attended the workshop, of whom 50 completed the program. Data were analyzed before and after the workshop using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test, and statistical power was calculated using G*Power.</p> Results <p>Study participants demonstrated strong knowledge in some areas and weaker understanding in others. The workshop contributed to improving their knowledge of the concept of false negatives in statistical results and highlighted the importance of publishing in international journals. This improvement was found to be independent of participant characteristics, such as academic performance or year of study. A statistical power of 97% was required to detect the observed effect.</p> Conclusion <p>The results revealed gaps in certain aspects of meta-research among participants, particularly in understanding study types and the differences between them.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Practices of novice researchers in the Faculty of Health Sciences at Damascus University and proposed improvements

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月2日

查看全文
  • Mohammed Al-Shafie,
  • Mhd Basheer Alameer,
  • Lujain Nahas,
  • Jad Samaan,
  • Laila Yakoub Agha,
  • Jameel Soqia,
  • Samer Mohsen

摘要

Introduction

In light of the widespread availability of scientific research, researchers must acquire critical and analytical skills related to different research methodologies to identify useful ones. This ability supports their academic careers by enabling them to generate valid evidence and apply research methodologies effectively. These skills are collectively referred to as meta-research skills.

Objective

The study aimed to assess the skills of novice researchers in the College of Health Sciences regarding meta-research and to evaluate the effectiveness of a workshop conducted to enhance these skills.

Methods

Students from the Faculty of Health Sciences with ongoing research projects were invited to attend a workshop on meta-research skills. The workshop evaluation tool consisted of the 10 items developed based on the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) and a previous literature review, using a standardized one-point scoring system. Before the workshop, a questionnaire was distributed to assess their abilities in research analysis and deduction. Following the workshop, the same questionnaire was administered to evaluate any improvement in their responses. A total of 84 students attended the workshop, of whom 50 completed the program. Data were analyzed before and after the workshop using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test, and statistical power was calculated using G*Power.

Results

Study participants demonstrated strong knowledge in some areas and weaker understanding in others. The workshop contributed to improving their knowledge of the concept of false negatives in statistical results and highlighted the importance of publishing in international journals. This improvement was found to be independent of participant characteristics, such as academic performance or year of study. A statistical power of 97% was required to detect the observed effect.

Conclusion

The results revealed gaps in certain aspects of meta-research among participants, particularly in understanding study types and the differences between them.