Education Research Abstract Primer

Institute for Medical Education

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

  1. Definition of an abstract:

The abstract is a succinct description of your project and data so that a reviewer/reader understands the purpose and structure of your project and can make a judgment about its quality.

  1. Forums where abstracts are needed:

Poster presentation, Oral presentation, Workshop, andManuscript

  1. Common categories of abstracts
  • Title: Reveals what the study/issue is about, can offer the conclusion, can be catchy and provocative, but should not exaggerate and should be true
  • Purpose: Main objective and background/rationale for your study
  • Methods: Explains type of study, participants, the educational intervention, data collection, and analysis
  • Results: Summary of your results
  • Conclusions: Your interpretation of your results, implications, limitations, reflections for future work or research
  1. Writing education objectives (ABCD’s of Objectives):
  1. Audience- Who? Who is this aimed at?
  2. Behavior - What do you expect them to be able to do? This should be an overt, observable behavior, even if the actual behavior is covert or mental in nature. If you can't see it, hear it, touch it, taste it, or smell it, you can't be sure your audience really learned it.
  3. Condition - How? Under what circumstances will the learning occur? What will the student be given or already be expected to know to accomplish the learning?
  4. Degree - How much? Must a specific set of criteria be met? Do you want total mastery (100%), do you want them to respond correctly 80% of the time, etc. A common (and totally non-scientific) setting is 80% of the time.

Other Resources:

  • Writing Goals and Objectives from UCSD
  • Florida State College of Medicine Office of Faculty Development: Writing Objectives
  1. How to avoidcommon mistakes:
  • State your goals clearly – the reader must understand the purpose of your project/research
  • The project and evaluation should reflect your goals/objectives
  • Discuss the implications of your project – What is the value of your project to others?However, be careful not to overstate your findings as you discuss the study results.
  • Include the weaknesses or limitations of your study
  • Follow specific instructions (Word count, font, etc)
  1. Other resources
  • Medical Student Research Office Webpage “How to Write an Abstract”
  • P Koopman - Carnegie Mellon University. “How to Write an Abstract”, 1997
  • Lindquist. Strategies for Writing A Competitive Research Abstract. Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing. 1993.

EDUCATION RESEARCH ABSTRACT checklist
This checklist can help you develop your abstract or evaluate the quality of your abstract.

Purpose:

Clear statement of problem/reason study was needed

Purpose/aim of your study (hypothesis or question to be answered)

Uses behavioral language (measurable actions)to describe your objectives – see resources above for writing objectives

Has the potential to demonstrate an outcome or be assessed

Methods:

Type of Study: Prospective, retrospective, observational

Setting and Timing (length of study)

Participants (level of learner) and inclusion/exclusion criteria

Structure: RCT, Volunteer vs. Selected vs. Entire group,

Intervention:, Change/addition of curriculum content, format, venue assessment modality

Assessments/Methods for data collection: validated survey, OSCE, MCQ test pre-post, survey, focus group, semi-structured interviews etc,

Outcome measures: knowledge, skills, attitudes, comfort, satisfaction, patient care

Methods of analysis: Qualitative, Quantitative, Mixed, Correlation, Causal-comparative

Results:

Number of participants

Demographics

Participation rate or response rate

Qualitative: most coded, themes, patterns, quotes

Quantitative: Stat significance (p value), standard deviation, means, %

Conclusion:

Interpretation of the most relevant result (not repetition of results)

Reflection:next steps, limitations

Overall Evaluation:

Length appropriate (not too long or too short) – may be rejected if too long

The impact of the project is described

Objectives are clear

Methods are clear and appropriate for the goals

The objectives were achieved (Results) or there is a plan for evaluating the success of the project

Conclusions are appropriate

There is/was plan for improvement/change based upon feedback or evaluation data

Novel (new findings) vs. confirm, refute or extent past findings

Relevant/important to audience

Sample Abstracts

Below are 2 past Education Research Day abstract submissions that we have altered to serve as examples to help authors develop effective abstracts. The authors gave us permission to alter their abstracts for this purpose. In each case, the first abstract needs improvement and describes the problem areas within the abstract. The second abstract reflects many of the suggested improvements.

Abstract #1 (Needs Improvement)

Title: An unfolding long case or case vignettes: A comparison of 2 instructional methods in inpatient geriatrics for medical students

Purpose:

The rise in elderly patients with hospitalizations notable for functional decline and high symptom burden creates a critical need for training interventions. 3rd year medical students encounter many older adults yet have inadequate opportunities to learn about their specific needs. Our aim is to assess the impact of 2 instructional methods (unfolding long case (ULC) versus Case Vignettes (CV)) in inpatient geriatrics on the knowledge & application skills of MS3.

Methods:

IRB exemption was obtained. 5 topics (perioperative assessment, delirium, venous thromboses, pressure ulcers & functional assessment) were selected from the literature. From a needs assessment, learning objectives, LC, CVs and an evaluation tool were developed. All MS3 on their medicine clerkship were assigned to either LC or CVs based on their rotation month. For LC sessions, students worked through an unfolding LC which provided relevance and detail of the patient in a sequential manner. For CV sessions, students worked together on a short case and then broke into groups to solve 2 other cases based on the topic of the day. A 60 item computer-based MCQ test administered immediately pre & post course assessed achievement. Exam questions assessed higher order cognitive skills such as knowledge application & patient management.

Results:

Average pre-course scores increased 18.5% from 62% to 80.5% post-course. Scores increased 18.7% & 18.2% in the CV & LC groups respectively. 93% found the course useful with realistic & relevant content.

Conclusion:

We sought to assess the impact of two instructional methods (unfolding long case (ULC) versus Case Vignettes (CV) in inpatient geriatrics on knowledge and skills of clerkship students. Scores increased 18.7% & 18.2% in the CV & LC groups respectively and most found the course useful with realistic & relevant content. The course was well received and over 75% of students would recommend this course to their peers.

Problems with this abstract:

  • Nicely designed study and methods but poorly described
  • No rationale for making a change. Is there any evidence for using either of these methods?
  • Some details are not needed in the abstract – IRB exemption
  • The N is missing
  • Not enough description of results relative to rest of abstract
  • Discussion is a repeat of the objectives and results
  • No reflection/next steps
  • The last sentence belongs in the results section

Abstract #1 (New and Improved)

Purpose:

The rise in elderly patients with hospitalizations notable for functional decline and high symptom burden creates a critical need for training interventions. 3rd year medical students (MS3) encounter many older adults yet have inadequate opportunities to learn about their specific needs. Case based learning incorporates active learning using relevant clinical problems. A single unfolding long case (LC) has been shown to improve knowledge & skills of residents without evidence that these transfer across cases. Working through multiple cases may result in enduring knowledge & better case transfer. Our aim is to assess the impact of 2 instructional methods (unfolding long case (ULC) versus Case Vignettes (CV)) in inpatient geriatrics on the knowledge & application skills of MS3 clerkship students

Methods:

5 topics were selected from the literature (Perioperative assessment, delirium, venous thromboses, pressure ulcers & functional assessment). From a needs assessment, learning objectives, LC, CVs and an evaluation tool were developed. All MS3 on their medicine clerkship were assigned to either LC or CVs based on their rotation month. For LC sessions, students worked through an unfolding LC which provided relevance and detail of the patient in a sequential manner. For CV sessions, students worked together on a short case and then broke into groups to solve 2 other cases based on the topic of the day. A 60 item computer-based MCQ test administered immediately pre & post course assessed achievement. Exam questions assessed higher order cognitive skills such as knowledge application & patient management.

Results:

The course has been conducted 12 times using each method six times. 127 students completed the course - 55% female, mean age 26. Average pre-course scores increased 18.5% from 62% to 80.5% post-course. Scores increased 18.7% & 18.2% in the CV & LC groups respectively. 93% found the course useful with realistic & relevant content. Between the two groups, 71% of students in the CVs compared to 44% in the LCs found they could apply concepts learnt to different scenarios.

Conclusion:

Results show significant improvement in the knowledge & application skills of MS3 in geriatric inpatient medicine topics with little difference between the two methods. Students in the CV group felt that they could apply the concepts learnt to different scenarios more so that those in the ULC group. Further data collection is ongoing to determine the impact of the course on retention of knowledge & skills at 1 year. The course was well received and over 75% of students would recommend this course to their peers.

Abstract #2 (Needs Improvement)

Purpose:

Helpmedical students be team members.

Methods:

We implemented a team building curriculum for medical students introducing team based teaching. Students first learned the role of teams in the healthcare profession and effective and ineffective team dynamics. They created ground rules, a food guide, and analyzed their team functioning. Faculty facilitated and debriefed the team building experience. We then evaluated the students at the completion of the course.

Results:

Most teams created similar ground rules. The dominant themes were respect/trust, shared expectations/responsibilities, clear communication and good group interaction. A debriefing session was held at the completion of the exercise and midway through their Anatomy experience for groups to reflect on and learn from their experience. All students completed the evaluation. Manystudents felt that the introductory exercise increased their comfort with teaching and learning as a team, that they developed teaching skills, respected and practiced ground rules, shared common goals and equal responsibility for achieving them, and productively communicated team dysfunction. Mostagreed that teamwork enhanced their educational experience in Anatomy; felt that their teams were functional; and that the curriculum provided additional benefits outside of Anatomy.

Conclusion:

A low risk team exercise can be used to frame the concept of teamwork and facilitate learning to work effectively as a team for a time when the stakes are greater and the outcomes riskier. Functioning as part of a team improves teamwork skills. Teaching and assessing teamwork skills enhances students’ appreciation of the value of teamwork and their ability to work as part of a team.

Problems with this abstract:

  • Objective is vague, lacks rationale for developing the curriculum/making change, and is not a sentence.
  • The description of the project is also vague – needs added detail for the reader to understand the curriculum
  • Evaluation: specific data is missing. Too much summary – should include numbers (most relevant)
  • The N is missing
  • Methods for data analysis not described
  • Discussion makes bold statements that are not supported by the data

Abstract #2 (New and Improved)

Purpose:

The emphasis of medical school training is to master individual knowledge and skills to improve the quality of patients’ lives. However, it is clear and reinforced by the ACGME, IOM and AAMC that physicians also need to team effectively with their patients, families and other health care professionals.

We have created and are implementing a curriculum to help frame, model and assess the team building skills of our medical students.

Methods:

For the medical school class of 2011 we created a team building curriculum that includes introductory exercises and restructuring of 2 critical first year medical school classes. We are implementing team based teaching and learning in Anatomy, and peer and self assessment of teamwork skills starting in Year One of school. The exercises included introductory materials about the role of teams in the health care profession, analysis of dynamics of effective and ineffective teams and an exercise where medical student teams created a guide rating foods in the neighborhood. Individual teams created ground rules for their medical school teams and analyzed their initial team functioning and periodically throughout the year with self, peer and a group assessment of team work skills and team functioning. Key medical school deans and course directors participated in these initial activities.

Results:

Data was obtained from all teams (N=142 students). Most teams shared common ground rules. The dominant themes were respect, shared expectations, positive morale, clear communication, trust and good team rapport. 20% felt that their teams functioned well because of shared responsibilities, effective communication, good organization, good group interaction and group process while half felt they struggled with time management/efficiency, and 15% with building consensus or realistic goal setting.

Conclusion:

A low risk team exercise frames the concept of teamwork, facilitating learning to work effectively as a team when the stakes are greater and the outcomes riskier. Providing students with data on group process, requiring the establishment of ground rules, and requiring self and peer assessment of team process should enhance students’ abilities to effectively function as members of a health care team.

Institute for Medical Education

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Education Research Abstract Primer developed by:

Lisa Coplit, MD

Erica Friedman, MD

Reena Karani, MD

Suzanne Rose, MD

Karen Zier, MD

Revised 12/2014