ACT-NOW Journal Club

Professional development is sometimes viewed as simply providing education and training. Education and training certainly provides a solid foundation for knowledge and skill development. This was the focus of the earlier stages of the ACT NOW project and we are continuing to add several key professional development activities including mentoring, clinical supervision, journal clubs, case studies and ongoing opportunities for education and training in a small group format. 

Some suggested Journals for reading

• Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
  
  
• Autism: The International Journal of Research & Practice
  
  
• Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
  
  
• Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
  
  
• Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
  
  
• The Australian Journal of Psychology
   

  Presentations
 

Why have a Journal Club?

Journal clubs offer the opportunity for professionals to develop their critical appraisal skills. In a journal club discussion, articles are evaluated as to their quality and also whether and how the findings can be applied to practice. Being a member of a journal club encourages the professional to set time aside to read articles, keep abreast of current research and issues and gain evidence for best practice.

What will the ACT-NOW Journal Club involve?

1. A list of interesting/topical journal articles will be posted on this page as possible topics or you can choose your own.
   
   
2. We will provide copies of the articles to each ReACT presenter taking part if you choose one that is on the list we provide.
   
   
3. ACT NOW staff will attend/present at your first Journal Club if you wish to/need help to get started.

Tips for a successful journal club

1. Select articles from peer reviewed, quality journals
   
   
2. Try to select recent articles
   
   
3. Choose a research paper rather than a review article that will not have a Methods section
   
   
4. A pair of articles may be good for a lively discussion particularly if they have opposite conclusions

Presenter tips

Preparation is the key!

1. Choose an interesting paper with data that you understand and can present
   
   
2. Make sure you understand the background information (look up the references)
   
   
3. Make sure you understand the experimental details (look up the references)

What to do in your presentation:

1. Describe what attracted you to the paper.

You may start your article presentation with a brief case presentation, or briefly explain how the article is relevant to a child or problem you are considering. This helps listeners more fully engage with your presentation and makes it more of a story.

2. Explain how you came across the paper.

Very briefly describe the search strategy you used to track down this particular article.

3. Describe the study and the research question:

• What type of question was asked? eg., diagnostic, therapeutic, aetiologic
  
  
• What type of study (method) was used? eg., randomised controlled trial, retrospective cohort, case control, meta-analysis, cross-sectional, descriptive
  
  
• Where was the study done?
  
  
• Are there any other outstanding features? eg., well known author or first study of its kind
  
  
• What is the research question or hypothesis?
  
  A well built research question has 4 basic components:
  
  (1) P opulation—who was studied?
  
  (2) I ntervention or exposure—what therapy, risk factor, tests, etc.?
  
  (3) C omparison or control–what alternative to intervention or exposure?
  
  (4) O utcome—clinical, functional, economic, etc.?

4. What is the relevance/importance/context of this question?

This information can usually be found in the author’s introduction where they put their study in the context of other literature.

5. Describe the method.

Following the brief background, give a bit more detail on the Population (the subjects), Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) related to the question:
 
6. Are the findings valid?

Be cautious to not get lost in the statistics/analysis section.

For a study of the efficacy of therapy, these questions apply:

• Did the experimental and control groups start out with a similar prognosis?
  
  - Were patients randomized?
  
  - Was randomisation concealed?
  
  - Were patients analysed in the groups to which they were randomised?
  
  - Were groups similar re known prognostic factors?
  
  
• Did the experimental and control groups retain a similar prognosis after the study started?
  
  - Were patients, clinicians, and outcome assessors aware of group allocation?
  
  - Was follow up complete and similar in each group?

7. Summarise the results

Limit your summary of the results to the primary question and only present secondary results if they are relevant. It is helpful to bring your listeners’ eyes to a particular row on a table or a bar on a graph to illustrate your point.

8. Can the results be applied to your own situation?

Finish with your assessment of the study’s external validity—can you apply these results to your setting/clients?

9. Conclude with your own decision about the utility of the study in your own work

If you started your presentation with a case, be sure to leave time to come back to the case at the end and try to apply the study’s findings to your situation. Give the listeners a sense of closure:

10. Prepare a short summary as a handout.

The summary will serve as your notes for the presentation and will help guide the group’s attention. It also provides a storable record of the article.

 Download Acrobat Reader