An Educational Evaluation of a Journal Club Approach to Teaching Undergraduate Health Care Research

BACKGROUND: Health care research is a common undergraduate health sciences requirement. There is limited literature regarding course structure, content, or learning outcomes; most courses have traditionally been taught through didactic lecture. This is misaligned with Generation Y learner values, as they desire guided learning, real-world examples, active engagement, learning through doing, and psychological safety. METHODS: A “journal club” approach to teaching health care research was implemented at Northeastern University in Fall 2018. Each session involved (1) a moment of reflection; (2) an introduction to the topic; (3) 1 student methods report presentation; (4) 2 student “journal club” self-directed structured article summary presentations; (5) large-group discussion; (6) plus/delta feedback to instructor. Each student completed 2 “journal club” and 1 methods presentations, 6 peer reviews, CITI research training, a quality improvement survey, and a final course reflection. We utilized a convergent mixed-methods educational evaluation, integrating data from 3 distinct sources—a quality improvement survey, final student course reflections, and Plus/Delta feedback—which were analyzed via thematic analysis. The Northeastern University Institutional Review Board exempted the study. RESULTS: Students appreciated the course structure and reported confidence in their critical appraisal abilities. Four qualitative themes emerged: (1) enabled a high degree of growth as students and scholars; (2) designed in thoughtful and unique format; (3) initially intimidated students and was academically challenging; and (4) prioritized and enabled psychological safety. CONCLUSIONS: Although initially intimidating and admittedly challenging, undergraduate health sciences students applauded the course’s curricular design and enabling of psychological safety, which aligned with Generation Y learner values, ultimately leading to growth in perceived and realized confidence and ability to critically review research articles.