A cross-sectional study to assess the performance of undergraduates on critical evaluation of a drug promotional literature and its correlation with their knowledge on research methodology

Abstract Background: Critical appraisal of drug promotional literature (DPL) exercise was included in the undergraduate (UG) curriculum to entrain them to perform a critical appraisal individually at the end of the exercise. The word “critical” denotes in-depth analysis, especially about the research methodology (RM)/scientific component. However, UG curriculum does not impart RM at the 2 nd -year MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of surgery) level. Hence, knowledge acquired at the end of the exercise is doubtful. This study addresses the noncoherence. Hence, the objectives of the current study were to assess the performance of UGs on critical evaluation of DPL using the checklist similar to the World Health Organization (WHO) checklist and to assess the UG’s knowledge on RM and basic pharmacology (BP) and to correlate it with their performance of critical evaluation of DPL. Materials and Methods: A validated checklist similar to the WHO checklist for DPL was devised (the addition was scientific component-a prerequisite for critical evaluation). A formal training session was conducted and then a new DPL was given for assessment, to a score of 10 followed by assessment on RM (25 multiple-choice questions [MCQs] and BP (10 MCQs). The performance of DPL was compared with the performance on RM and BP using means and proportions as, % of students scoring >70%, >50% and average class score % in all three tests. Performance coherence was also assessed using Pearson’s correlation. Results: Students’ performance of DPL vs. RM with ≥70% was 99.2% vs. 23.9%; ≥50% was 100% vs. 65.2%; and the average class score was 89.63% vs. 59.41%. P < 0.001 in all comparisons was found. Pearson’s correlate for comparison between DPL and RM was, r = −0.086. Conclusion: The poor performance of undergraduates on Research Methodology compared to drug promotional literature is due to lack of knowledge on research methodology among II year undergraduates. Hence, DPL exercise will be fruitful to undergraduates when it is provided with the training session on research methodology as it is a important component required for the critical evaluation of a drug promotional material.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrsm.jcrsm_86_24
Primary Topic
Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A cross-sectional study to assess the performance of undergraduates on critical evaluation of a drug promotional literature and its correlation with their knowledge on research methodology

B. Maharani, Prakash Mathiyalagen, L. N. Babu
Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine
Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
article

A cross-sectional study to assess the performance of undergraduates on critical evaluation of a drug promotional literature and its correlation with their knowledge on research methodology

B. Maharani, Prakash Mathiyalagen, L. N. Babu
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background: Critical appraisal of drug promotional literature (DPL) exercise was included in the undergraduate (UG) curriculum to entrain them to perform a critical appraisal individually at the end of the exercise. The word “critical” denotes in-depth analysis, especially about the research methodology (RM)/scientific component. However, UG curriculum does not impart RM at the 2 nd -year MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of surgery) level. Hence, knowledge acquired at the end of the exercise is doubtful. This study addresses the noncoherence. Hence, the objectives of the current study were to assess the performance of UGs on critical evaluation of DPL using the checklist similar to the World Health Organization (WHO) checklist and to assess the UG’s knowledge on RM and basic pharmacology (BP) and to correlate it with their performance of critical evaluation of DPL. Materials and Methods: A validated checklist similar to the WHO checklist for DPL was devised (the addition was scientific component-a prerequisite for critical evaluation). A formal training session was conducted and then a new DPL was given for assessment, to a score of 10 followed by assessment on RM (25 multiple-choice questions [MCQs] and BP (10 MCQs). The performance of DPL was compared with the performance on RM and BP using means and proportions as, % of students scoring >70%, >50% and average class score % in all three tests. Performance coherence was also assessed using Pearson’s correlation. Results: Students’ performance of DPL vs. RM with ≥70% was 99.2% vs. 23.9%; ≥50% was 100% vs. 65.2%; and the average class score was 89.63% vs. 59.41%. P < 0.001 in all comparisons was found. Pearson’s correlate for comparison between DPL and RM was, r = −0.086. Conclusion: The poor performance of undergraduates on Research Methodology compared to drug promotional literature is due to lack of knowledge on research methodology among II year undergraduates. Hence, DPL exercise will be fruitful to undergraduates when it is provided with the training session on research methodology as it is a important component required for the critical evaluation of a drug promotional material.

Journal of Current Research in Scientific MedicineVol. 11(1)
Indira Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.