[Influence of sub-group discussion on the developing skills for critical reading of research papers].
OBJECTIVE
To compare a three steps (3S) vs. two steps (2S) active participative promoting strategies (APPS) in critical reading of research papers in first degree residents.


METHODS
An APPS educational intervention in 3S vs. 2S was developed. Two groups by simple random technique were study. The experimental group (A) with 13 residents and a control group (B) with 12. Three indicators were use (interpretation, judgement and proposal). The instrument had 120 items. In both groups, the educational strategies used were similar in contents. In-group A (3S) the subgroup discussion was emphasized. Group discussion and the resolution of extra classroom item guides performed was similar in both groups. Non parametric statistical tests were performed by a blind researcher.


RESULTS
The reliability of the instrument was 0.89 by Kuder-Richardson procedure. The initial results were very low and showed an increase in the median in both groups. More students in-group A were located out of a random category. In both groups, Mc Nemar test results were significant.


CONCLUSIONS
The 3S strategy is better than 2S in developing critical reading in research papers.
Elizaldi-Lozano
Norberto
N
Centro de Investigación Educativa y Formación Docente, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Monterrey, Nuevo Léon, Mexico. nelizaldi@yahoo.com.mx
Insfrán-Sánchez
Myriam
M
Cobos-Aguilar
Héctor
H
D035843:Biomedical Research; D006126:Group Processes; D007396:Internship and Residency; D007600:Judgment; D011932:Reading