Effect of book reviewing workshop on awareness of, aptitude for and attitude toward book reviews in faculty members of faculty of management and medical information

INTRODUCTION: Works evaluation and critique is one of the most important phases in scientific production cycle. Reviewers need some aptitude about rules and principles of writing good review. Considering the important role of books for storage and transferring the scientific findings, book reviewing is vital to scientific progress. Despite this fact, investigation of Isfahan University of Medical Science's journal, demonstrated the number of published book reviews to be very small. This study aims to investigate the influence of reviewing training courses on participants’ book reviewing awareness, attitude, and aptitude. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study method is experimental with two group design (with pre-test and post-test) and applied. Statistical population is of all faculty members of the faculty of management and medical information of Isfahan University of Medical Science, including both hired and contracted employees, which, according to faculty's department of Education, consists of 86 people. The sampling method used in this study is random. Number of samples in case and control groups was calculated using the following equation of n= (z1 + z2) 2 (2s2)/d2 and is 15 people. One checklist and two questionnaires were the means of data collection. Data were analyzed using SPSS 18.0 software and two level of descriptive (mean and SD) and inferential statistics (t-test and t-paired). RESULTS: Findings showed that the mean score of awareness of book reviews in case group increased meaningfully after the training course (55.7) compared to the score prior to the intervention (33.1), P < 0.001. On the other hand, the mean score of awareness of book reviews in control group remained mostly the same before (31.6) and after intervention (35.1), P = 0.35. The mean score of attitude toward book reviews showed no significant difference before and after intervention in both case group (71.4 before intervention and 74.4 after intervention, P = 0.11) and control group (70.9 before intervention and 74.4 after intervention, P = 0.91). The mean score of book reviewing aptitude in case group showed a significant increase from 10.2 ± 6.7 before intervention to 53.6 ± 26.3, showing a 43.4 increase (P < 0.001), while the control group's mean score showed no significant difference (8.5 before intervention and 8.6 after intervention, P = 0.996). Conclusion: This study showed a significant influence of training course on participants’ book reviewing aptitude and awareness. But attitude toward book reviews was in good level from the beginning to the end and remained mostly unchanged.