{"id":{"repo_id":"unm","oai_identifier":"oai:digitalrepository.unm.edu:educ_llss_etds-1052"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/unm/oai:digitalrepository.unm.edu:educ_llss_etds-1052","repository":{"repo_id":"unm","name":"University of New Mexico","base_url":"https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"A SCAFFOLDED INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL TO TEACH DOCTOR OF PHARMACY STUDENTS TO EVALUATE RANDOMIZED AND NON-RANDOMIZED MEDICAL STUDIES ON A SIMILAR TOPIC TO REACH A CLINICAL CONCLUSION","abstract":"The goal of this study was to test a scaffolded instructional model in a complex Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) lesson where students evaluated three different medical studies (RCT, case-control, and cohort) on the same topic and used those studies to reach an evidence-based conclusion. The hypothesis was that the students literature evaluation skills and subsequent application of the literature to address a clinical question would more closely approximate the experts following implementation of the model. The results do not fully support the hypothesis. The conclusions were: (1) third-year doctor of pharmacy students at the college have a limited ability to evaluate medical literature of varying qualities and types and conflicting conclusions; (2) prior to reading the RCT, students' initial clinical conclusions more closely resembled the experts', potentially indicating an unbalanced influence of the RCT, either from RCT bias/preconceptions or a lack of skills transfer in evaluating the RCT; and (3) the instructional model needs further development by adding explicit instructional scaffolding around the Medical Literature Evaluation (MLE) Rubric, vocabulary, and directly addressing student preconceptions/biases.'","abstract_html":"The goal of this study was to test a scaffolded instructional model in a complex Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) lesson where students evaluated three different medical studies (RCT, case-control, and cohort) on the same topic and used those studies to reach an evidence-based conclusion. The hypothesis was that the students literature evaluation skills and subsequent application of the literature to address a clinical question would more closely approximate the experts following implementation of the model. The results do not fully support the hypothesis. The conclusions were: (1) third-year doctor of pharmacy students at the college have a limited ability to evaluate medical literature of varying qualities and types and conflicting conclusions; (2) prior to reading the RCT, students' initial clinical conclusions more closely resembled the experts', potentially indicating an unbalanced influence of the RCT, either from RCT bias/preconceptions or a lack of skills transfer in evaluating the RCT; and (3) the instructional model needs further development by adding explicit instructional scaffolding around the Medical Literature Evaluation (MLE) Rubric, vocabulary, and directly addressing student preconceptions/biases.'","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Dawn, Stefani"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Language, Literacy, and Sociocultural Studies","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Rosalita, Mitchell","Troutman, William","Bryant, Richard","Velasquez Torres, Diane"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013-01-31T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2013-01-31T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:26:29Z","subjects":["pharmacy education","medical education","teaching evidence based medicine","instruction","instructional scaffolding","Medical Literature Evaluation Rubric","Clinical Literature Evaluation Rubric","RCT bias","preconceptions","teaching","curriculum"],"languages":["English"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/educ_llss_etds/53"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/educ_llss_etds/53","href":"https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/educ_llss_etds/53","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/1928/22037","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Rosalita, Mitchell","Troutman, William","Bryant, Richard","Velasquez Torres, Diane"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Dawn, Stefani"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2013-01-31T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Language, Literacy, and Sociocultural Studies"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation","Doctoral"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["pharmacy education","medical education","teaching evidence based medicine","instruction","instructional scaffolding","Medical Literature Evaluation Rubric","Clinical Literature Evaluation Rubric","RCT bias","preconceptions","teaching","curriculum"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/1928/22037","https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/educ_llss_etds/53"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The goal of this study was to test a scaffolded instructional model in a complex Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) lesson where students evaluated three different medical studies (RCT, case-control, and cohort) on the same topic and used those studies to reach an evidence-based conclusion. The hypothesis was that the students literature evaluation skills and subsequent application of the literature to address a clinical question would more closely approximate the experts following implementation of the model. The results do not fully support the hypothesis. The conclusions were: (1) third-year doctor of pharmacy students at the college have a limited ability to evaluate medical literature of varying qualities and types and conflicting conclusions; (2) prior to reading the RCT, students' initial clinical conclusions more closely resembled the experts', potentially indicating an unbalanced influence of the RCT, either from RCT bias/preconceptions or a lack of skills transfer in evaluating the RCT; and (3) the instructional model needs further development by adding explicit instructional scaffolding around the Medical Literature Evaluation (MLE) Rubric, vocabulary, and directly addressing student preconceptions/biases.'"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A SCAFFOLDED INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL TO TEACH DOCTOR OF PHARMACY STUDENTS TO EVALUATE RANDOMIZED AND NON-RANDOMIZED MEDICAL STUDIES ON A SIMILAR TOPIC TO REACH A CLINICAL CONCLUSION"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Rosalita, Mitchell","Troutman, William","Bryant, Richard","Velasquez Torres, Diane"],"dc:creator":["Dawn, Stefani"],"dc:date.available":["2013-01-31T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The goal of this study was to test a scaffolded instructional model in a complex Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) lesson where students evaluated three different medical studies (RCT, case-control, and cohort) on the same topic and used those studies to reach an evidence-based conclusion. The hypothesis was that the students literature evaluation skills and subsequent application of the literature to address a clinical question would more closely approximate the experts following implementation of the model. The results do not fully support the hypothesis. The conclusions were: (1) third-year doctor of pharmacy students at the college have a limited ability to evaluate medical literature of varying qualities and types and conflicting conclusions; (2) prior to reading the RCT, students' initial clinical conclusions more closely resembled the experts', potentially indicating an unbalanced influence of the RCT, either from RCT bias/preconceptions or a lack of skills transfer in evaluating the RCT; and (3) the instructional model needs further development by adding explicit instructional scaffolding around the Medical Literature Evaluation (MLE) Rubric, vocabulary, and directly addressing student preconceptions/biases.'"],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/1928/22037","https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/educ_llss_etds/53"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:subject":["pharmacy education","medical education","teaching evidence based medicine","instruction","instructional scaffolding","Medical Literature Evaluation Rubric","Clinical Literature Evaluation Rubric","RCT bias","preconceptions","teaching","curriculum"],"dc:title":["A SCAFFOLDED INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL TO TEACH DOCTOR OF PHARMACY STUDENTS TO EVALUATE RANDOMIZED AND NON-RANDOMIZED MEDICAL STUDIES ON A SIMILAR TOPIC TO REACH A CLINICAL CONCLUSION"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Language, Literacy, and Sociocultural Studies"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation","Doctoral"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:26:29Z"}