Document Type : Original Article
Authors
- . Nayere Sadat Soleimanzade Najafi
- . Hasan Ashrafi‑rizi 1
- . Mohammad Hossein Yarmohammadian 2
- . Leila Shahrzadi
- . Akbar Hasanzade 3
1 Health Information Technology Research Center
2 Health Management and Economics Research Center
3 Department of Biostatistics, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
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.
Keywords
Singapore Med J 2010; 51:685‑8.
2. Burgdorf WH, Traubinger Str. Reviewing medical books: A quarter
century of observations. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008;59: e1‑3.
3. Chen CC. Current Status of Biomedical Book Reviewing: Part IV.
Major American and British Biomedical book publishers. Bull Med
Libr Assoc 1974;62:302‑7.
4. Malachi H. Textbook Review: Definitions and Criteria, Principles and
Standards of the Academic Book. Tehran: Sokhane Samt; 2007.
5. Zakeri M. Principles and the results of review. In: Ali Owjabi, Editors.
AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran: Khaneh
Ketab (Iran Book House); 2009:153‑68.
6. Aledavood A. Some tips on review. Journal of Ketab‑e Mah‑e
Kolliyat 2011;15:18‑9.
7. Barker P. Book reviews online. Assoc Learn Technol J 1997; 5:54‑62.
8. Sotude H. Social Psychology. Tehran: Avayenoor; 2001.
9. Rafii A. Critique of correction of Hafez. In: Ali Owjabi, Editors. AYAR‑I
NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran: Khaneh Ketab (Iran
Book House); 2009:169‑205.
10. Parsai H. Criticism proves a philosophical act. In: Ali Owjabi, Editors.
AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran: Khaneh
Ketab (Iran Book House); 2010:49‑66.
11. Hartley J. Book reviewing in the BJET: A survey of BJET’s referees’
and writers’ views. Br J Educ Technol 2005; 36:897‑905.
12. Asefzadeh S. Critical analysis of research studies in medical science.
Research in Medicine (Medical Journal). Shahidbeheshti Univ Med
Sci 2005;29:195‑201.
13. Available from: http://www.iranculture.org. [Last accessed on
2011 Nov 30].
14. The Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution. Regulations to
promote research and education in situation approved by faculty
rank. Tehran: The Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution; 2011.
15. Rafiei S, Abdollahzadeh S, Ghajarzadeh M, Habibollahi P,
Fayazbakhsh A. The effect of introducing evidence based medicine
on critical appraisal skills of medical students. International Journal
of Medical Education 2008;8:149‑53.
16. Ashrafi‑rizi H, Kazempour Z. Book review, guide for librarians, writers
and translators. Tehran: Chapar; 2010.
17. Homayoonpour H. Necessity and Benefits of Review. In: Ali Owjabi,
Editors. AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran:
Khaneh Ketab (Iran Book House); 2009: 249‑353.18. Hekmat N. Tips on Book Review. In: Ali Owjabi, Editors. AYAR‑I
NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran: Khaneh Ketab (Iran
Book House); 2010: 77‑81.
19. Fadaii G. Familiarity with manuscripts and rare books (Persian and
Arabic). Tehran: Samt; 2007.
20. Doroodi F. Effective factors in Book Review. Book Q 1999;
75: 173‑84.
21. Shayanfar H, Sadathosini S, Sanatinajar M, Mehroi B. Guide to
authoring, translation and publishing academic textbooks‑Applied.
Tehran University of Applied Science;2009.
22. Jahanbakhsh J. Critics at the time of indigence. In: Ali Owjabi,
Editors. AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran:
Khaneh Ketab (Iran Book House); 2010:67‑76.
23. Zakiani G. Foundations of religious tolerance Review. In: Ali Owjabi,
Editors. AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran:
Khaneh Ketab (Iran Book House); 2010:81‑98.
24. Fouladi A. Critique in postmoderne Position. In: Ali Owjabi, Editors.
AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing. Tehran: Khaneh
Ketab (Iran Book House); 2010:131‑40.
25. Kompanizare M. Review and coordinate positions on Islamic culture.
In: Ali Owjabi, Editors. AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book Reviewing.
Tehran: Khaneh Ketab (Iran Book House); 2010:141‑70.
26. MohammadzadeR. Concerns and suggestions about the criticism and
judgment. In: Ali Owjabi, Editors. AYAR‑I NAQD: Principles of Book
Reviewing. Tehran: Khaneh Ketab (Iran Book House); 2010:171‑6.
27. Khoramshahi B. Book Review. In: Khaneh Ketab. Ketab‑e
NaqdvaNaqd‑e Ketab. (A Collection of essays).Tehran: Khaneh
Ketab; 2007:13‑36.
28. Eslami H. Ethic of Review. In: Khaneh Ketab. Ketab‑e NaqdvaNaqd‑e
Ketab. (A Collection of essays). Tehran: KhanehKetab 2007: 79‑106.
29. Karimi Y. Social Psychology (theories, concepts, applications).
Tehran: Arsbaran; 2003.
30. Karimi Y. Social psychology and attitude change of energy
consumers. Iran Energy 2005;9:7‑126.
31. Matlabi M. Effects of mental health education program on
knowledge, attitude and performance of health practitioner.
Ofoghedanesh 1996;2:15‑20.
32. Mohammadi B, Valizade S, Lakdizgi S. Effect of education on
knowledge, attitude and practice of medical nursing and midwifery
instructors concerning effective behaviors at clinical teaching. Iran
J Instr Med 2003;9:60‑6.
33. Soltaniarabshahi K, Ajami A, Siabani S. Effect of workshop on quality
of the teaching assistants. Iran Univ Med Sci J 2004;11:49‑58.
)