Harmonising the Teaching of Scientific Communication Skills Through the Development of an E-Learning Tool

Effective communication is a fundamental graduate attribute. University graduates are expected to be critical thinkers who can apply their knowledge and research skills to solve complex problems in a range of contexts. Developing and applying these skills requires a consistent approach to teaching and assessment of scientific communication at the undergraduate level. Despite being taught by leading academics with an abundance of scientific communication experience, anecdotal student feedback suggests that instruction across disciplines varies; creating student confusion and a lack of confidence in scientific literacy more broadly. Given the importance of preparing research-ready graduates, our project adopted a multidisciplinary approach to harmonise teaching scientific communication skills across subjects in the School of Biomedical Sciences. This was achieved through the development of an e-learning module designed to teach the requisite skills that can be applied across all forms of scientific communication. The module is innovative in enhancing students’ scientific literacy skills. Students can develop, practise and demonstrate their critical thinking and communication skills, as well as improve their understanding of scientific writing by completing the activities embedded within the two-level module; with the added benefit of strengthening their understanding of scientific communication (and associated skills) and thereby improving student employability

Perceptions of an assessment literacy module to improve academic judgement – a pilot study

Expectation differences between assessors and students regarding assignment marking often results in student dissatisfaction accompanied by student complaints, indicating that despite following assignment task briefs and marking criteria, students’ desired grades were not achieved. The Assessment Literacy Module (ALM) is an online grading tool designed to promote student development of evaluative judgement. The ALM allows evaluation of sample assignments – with students being the assessor – guided by assignment marking standards that convey how assessment criteria relate to the assignment outcome; a process that often highlights discrepancies in student academic judgement. Our pilot study surveyed staff (N = 13) and students (N = 105) to gauge perceptions of the impact of the ALM on the student learning experience. Students from eight subjects in Bioscience, Science and Biomedicine, across all three undergraduate levels, indicated that they now have a better understanding of their assessment criteria (85.7%), that they found the ALM helpful in preparing their assignments (87.6%), and that they are more confident with their assessment quality (78.1%). Staff indicated that they perceived students were able to use the feedback comments on the sample assignments to better understand assignment rubrics (69.2%), and that students who used the ALM had better comprehension of assessment expectations (84.6%)

Factors Associated with Revision Surgery after Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures

Background: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. Methods: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. Results: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (fo

Fracture fixation in the operative management of hip fractures (FAITH): an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. Methods For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. Findings Between Mar