This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (6)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Medical Practice  • Medical Education  • Prognosis/ Outcomes  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Darcy A. Reed, MD, MPH; David A. Cook, MD, MHPE; Thomas J. Beckman, MD; Rachel B. Levine, MD, MPH; David E. Kern, MD, MPH; Scott M. Wright, MD

JAMA. 2007;298(9):1002-1009.

Context  Methodological shortcomings in medical education research are often attributed to insufficient funding, yet an association between funding and study quality has not been established.

Objectives  To develop and evaluate an instrument for measuring the quality of education research studies and to assess the relationship between funding and study quality.

Design, Setting, and Participants  Internal consistency, interrater and intrarater reliability, and criterion validity were determined for a 10-item medical education research study quality instrument (MERSQI). This was applied to 210 medical education research studies published in 13 peer-reviewed journals between September 1, 2002, and December 31, 2003. The amount of funding obtained per study and the publication record of the first author were determined by survey.

Main Outcome Measures  Study quality as measured by the MERSQI (potential maximum total score, 18; maximum domain score, 3), amount of funding per study, and previous publications by the first author.

Results  The mean MERSQI score was 9.95 (SD, 2.34; range, 5-16). Mean domain scores were highest for data analysis (2.58) and lowest for validity (0.69). Intraclass correlation coefficient ranges for interrater and intrarater reliability were 0.72 to 0.98 and 0.78 to 0.998, respectively. Total MERSQI scores were associated with expert quality ratings (Spearman , 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.84; P < .001), 3-year citation rate (0.8 increase in score per 10 citations; 95% CI, 0.03-1.30; P = .003), and journal impact factor (1.0 increase in score per 6-unit increase in impact factor; 95% CI, 0.34-1.56; P = .003). In multivariate analysis, MERSQI scores were independently associated with study funding of $20 000 or more (0.95 increase in score; 95% CI, 0.22-1.86; P = .045) and previous medical education publications by the first author (1.07 increase in score per 20 publications; 95% CI, 0.15-2.23; P = .047).

Conclusion  The quality of published medical education research is associated with study funding.

Author Affiliations: Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota (Drs Reed, Cook, and Beckman); and Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland (Drs Levine, Kern, and Wright).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Trends in Study Methods Used in Undergraduate Medical Education Research, 1969-2007
Amy Baernstein, Hillary K. Liss, Patricia A. Carney, and Joann G. Elmore
JAMA. 2007;298(9):1038-1045.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Internet-Based Learning in the Health Professions: A Meta-analysis
Cook et al.
JAMA 2008;300:1181-1196.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Education in Anesthesiology Should Be Evidenced-Based
Schell et al.
Anesth. Analg. 2008;106:1587-1588.
FULL TEXT