فهرست نشریات علمی دسترسی آزاد ایران

Introduction: Works evaluation and critique is one of the most important phases in scientificproduction cycle. Reviewers need some aptitude about rules and principles of writing good review.Considering the important role of books for storage and transferring the scientific findings, bookreviewing is vital to scientific progress. Despite this fact, investigation of Isfahan University of MedicalScience’s journal, demonstrated the number of published book reviews to be very small. This studyaims to investigate the influence of reviewing training courses on participants’ book reviewingawareness, attitude, and aptitude. Materials and Methods: The study method is experimental withtwo group design (with pre‑test and post‑test) and applied. Statistical population is of all facultymembers of the faculty of management and medical information of Isfahan University of MedicalScience, including both hired and contracted employees, which, according to faculty’s departmentof Education, consists of 86 people. The sampling method used in this study is random. Numberof samples in case and control groups was calculated using the following equation of n= (z1 + z2)2 (2s2)/d2 and is 15 people. One checklist and two questionnaires were the means of data collection.Data were analyzed using SPSS 18.0 software and two level of descriptive (mean and SD) andinferential statistics (t‑test and t‑paired). Results: Findings showed that the mean score of awarenessof book reviews in case group increased meaningfully after the training course (55.7) compared to thescore prior to the intervention (33.1), P < 0.001. On the other hand, the mean score of awareness ofbook reviews in control group remained mostly the same before (31.6) and after intervention (35.1),P = 0.35. The mean score of attitude toward book reviews showed no significant difference beforeand after intervention in both case group (71.4 before intervention and 74.4 after intervention,P = 0.11) and control group (70.9 before intervention and 74.4 after intervention, P = 0.91).The mean score of book reviewing aptitude in case group showed a significant increase from10.2 ± 6.7 before intervention to 53.6 ± 26.3, showing a 43.4 increase (P < 0.001), while the controlgroup’s mean score showed no significantdifference (8.5 before intervention and 8.6 afterintervention, P = 0.996). Conclusion: This studyshowed a significant influence of training courseon participants’ book reviewing aptitude andawareness. But attitude toward book reviewswas in good level from the beginning to the endand remained mostly unchanged.