Habilidades docentes en alumnos tutores en lectura crítica de investigación médica durante el internado de pregrado.

Teaching skills of medical student tutors in research critical appraisal during internship
Héctor Cobos-Aguilara, Patricia Pérez-Cortésb, Leonardo Alejandro Bracho-Velac, Mario Alberto Garza-Garzad, Gabriel Dávila-Rodrígueze, Daniel Omar López-Juárezf, Evelyn Maldonado-Gonzálezg, Liliana Zapata-Aguirreg

a Coordinación de Internado de Pregrado, Ciencias Clínicas, División de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Monterrey, Monterrey, N.L., México
b Ciencias Clínicas, División de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Monterrey, Monterrey, N.L., México
c Geriatría, Hospital San José, Monterrey, Monterrey, N.L., México
d Práctica privada, Monterrey, N.L., México
e Medicina Interna, Hospital General de Zona N° 4, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Monterrey, N.L., México
f Traumatología, Unidad Médica de Alta Especialidad N° 21, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Monterrey, N.L., México
g División Ciencias de la Salud, Ciencias Clínicas, Universidad de Monterrey, Monterrey, N.L., México

Recepción 9 de noviembre de 2013; aceptación 23 de enero de 2014

Palabras Clave

Alumnos tutores; lectura crítica; internado de pregrado; México.

Keywords

Cross-peer teaching; Critical appraisal; Internship; Mexico.

Abstract

Introduction: Students may be tutors in clinical medicine and other areas.

Objective: To evaluate the teaching abilities of students as tutors in a critical appraisal research course, during their internship.

Material and Methods: Two groups were studied: G1 (n=5) was taught by a Professor and included group discussions, and G2 had four student tutors and engaged in sub-group discussions (n=10). The course lasted 40 hours and was conducted on the basis of resolving reading guide’s in-house and referred discussion. Five instruments were applied: 1) critical reading including 108 items, 2) sub-group activities led by the professor, included 17 items, 3) student activities in sub-group discussions, with 18 items, 4) evaluation of the professor’s qualitative characteristics by the students that included 8 items and 5) a self-evaluation of the student tutor consisting of 10 items. Instruments 1, 2 and 4 were evaluated before and after the course. Instrument 1 was graded by adding the correct answers and subtracting those that were incorrect; medians were recorded. Both groups were compared with Mann Whitney U and Wilcoxon tests, statistical weight and randomness. A Likert scale was also used with values ranging from 1 (minimum) to 4 (maximum), in instruments 2 to 5; the values were added and medians were used. Consistency was determined in instruments 1 to 4.

Results: No significant differences were detected between both groups in critical reading before and after the interventions, although statistical weight did increase and randomness decreased in G2. Instruments 2, 3 and 4 (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.75), reported adequate medians in almost all aspects; instrument 2 revealed almost maximum final results in G2. The tutors’ affection for students increased.

Discussion: Student tutors can develop complex teaching abilities and foster student learning. These strategies are underutilized in our milieu.