Submission ID 76507
| Code | WB-4 |
|---|---|
| At the end of this workshop, participants will be able to: | |
| Learning Objective 1 | Model the 'known to new' writing strategy to increase logical connections for your reader |
| Learning Objective 2 | Identify the appropriate indications for using active voice, and utilize it in your writing |
| Learning Objective 3 | Demonstrate clear, measurable strategies to immediately implement in your own writing |
| Category | Medical Education |
| Type | Workshop |
| Title | Writing Effectively in the Medical Sciences |
| Rationale/Background | Writing is an important skill throughout our careers as medical professionals. It is the method through which we communicate with each other, with our patients, with the academic community, with learners, and in patient care. Clear, concise writing has the ability to inform in a manner than reduces error (1). The clarity we display in writing has real-world consequences. It can determine whether a paper is published, funding secured, and ultimately how effectively research is distributed and acted upon. Conversely, bad writing often prevents or delays the publication of good science (2). Academic institutions, physicians, and medical researchers have been called upon to improve their writing and provide curriculum on writing to medical students (3). This workshop is an attempt to respond to this call to action. This workshop teaches several key and easily implementable writing strategies specifically oriented towards medical students, residents, and medical researchers. Common pitfalls in medical writing are addressed. The workshop exclusively uses examples from existing literature, to give participants a clear idea of where and when they will encounter writing pitfalls, what they can do to avoid them, and how to increase the effectiveness of their own writing. |
| Instructional Methods | Four topics are covered in this workshop, each with several key lessons. The four topics are: logic & structure, sentence structure, active voice, and improving clarity. Within each topic are two or three lessons taught with examples and active participation. First, the lesson is defined and supported with examples. Each example is taken from existing literature and rendered anonymous. These examples will be analyzed by the students to illustrate the principle, and then for them determine where the author went wrong in the context of the lesson. Thereafter, several smaller examples will be brought forward in multiple choice or short answer format for participants to solidify their understanding of the principle being taught. There are two longer exercises in which the participants will have the opportunity to actively practice several strategies at once by reorganizing a short passage. Finally, there will be a short quiz at the end to ensure participants have understood the key points. To note, this workshop has been delivered with success and positive feedback to science researchers in Canada and in Europe, and to students at one Canadian medical school. More than 2/3 of the workshop involves active participation. |
| Target Audience | Medical research writers: full time academic professionals, residents, specialists conducting clinic based studies Medical residents in specialty programs Medical students, whether or not they are involved in research |
| Keyword 1 | writing |
| Keyword 2 | communication |
| Keyword 3 | research |
| Abstract content most relevant to: (check all that apply) | Continuing Professional Development (CPD) (faculty development, CME)
Residency Education Undergraduate Medical Education |
| Abstract Track - First Choice | Curriculum |
| Curriculum | Competency-Based Education Integrated Inter-Professional Quality improvement |
| Authors | Imran Bagha Imran Bagha |
