Healthcare research: how to set up a successful journal club

Journal clubs can provide a forum for nurse researchers to meet and discuss research and innovative clinical practice

Journal clubs in healthcare education and professional development are recognised worldwide by three common aspects: providing an update of the current literature; assisting in clinical practice; and improving the participant's critical reading skills (Singh and Yogi 2020). They stem from a long-standing tradition in the field of medicine, dating back to the beginning of the 20th century.

These clubs were created for medical professionals to meet and discuss the latest research results and clinical practices in their field. One of the earliest recorded journal clubs in medicine was started in the late 19th century by Sir William Osler, a renowned physician and professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University in the United States. Sir William believed that journal clubs could help improve the practice of medicine by encouraging critical thinking and collaboration among physicians.

Since then, they have become an important tool in implementing evidence-based medicine, involving regular meetings of multidisciplinary professionals to present and critically discuss the clinical applicability of articles in current medical journals (Topf et al 2017).

Over the years, journal clubs have evolved to encompass various disciplines beyond medicine, including nursing, pharmacy, psychology and academic research. They continue to be a valuable tool for staying abreast of the latest research, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration and improving the quality of research and clinical practice. Today, they are common in academic and professional settings, and participants meet regularly to discuss and critique recent research articles.

Journal clubs can be formalised and structured or informal and flexible

Some clubs are formalised and structured, with designated leaders and assigned readings, while others are more informal and flexible, with participants taking turns to select and present articles for discussion (Eusuf and Shelton 2022). Other changes have taken place over the years, including a wide range of forms, from traditional in-person meetings to virtual clubs conducted online (Mark et al 2021). Although the literature extensively describes how the club is managed in various contexts without identifying a universally accepted model, here we would like to share the experience of revisiting the management of the journal club in a research and innovation department located in a university hospital in Italy. This narrative might offer points for reflection for other organisations using this tool.

‘From the outset, our department has used the online journal club format as a tool to support staff in improving knowledge and awareness of environmental pathologies, the focus of our research activities’

In 2020, the Department of Integrated Activities Research and Innovation (DAIRI) was established as an evolution of our research, training and innovation infrastructure established in 2011 at a hospital located in Alessandria, a city in Northern Italy (Bolgeo et al 2023). It is a research department based in two different healthcare organisations, a university hospital and a local health authority, and it promotes and supports various types of research (pre-clinical, clinical, translational, population, care and organisational) using qualified and dedicated staff and state-of-the-art technology. Its role is to define a research programme, monitor its progress, evaluate the results obtained concerning the hypotheses, and optimise and disseminate the results.

All staff are involved in developing critical thinking and article evaluation skills

From the outset, our department has used the online journal club format as a tool to support staff in improving knowledge and awareness of environmental pathologies, the focus of our research activities. The journal clubs were structured around the critical analysis of articles selected from the ‘scientific evidence review’, a scientific information and dissemination format implemented daily with new articles made by DAIRI’s documentation centre. A facilitator, working with a department research coordinator, encouraged discussion and participation from all participants.

Healthcare professionals, including biologists such as data managers, clinical research coordinators, research nurses and statisticians, have always participated in the clubs. Meetings were held fortnightly and always on the same day of the week and at the same time. Although this tool initially allowed staff to keep abreast of the bibliographic evidence on our topics of interest and, at the same time, involve all the staff in developing critical thinking and article evaluation skills, some limitations still needed to be improved in structuring this version of our journal club.

• RELATED: Don’t penalise nurse research in a changing educational climate

Our department’s strategic aim is to involve clinical practitioners in the research process and recognise that research leadership is fundamental in assessing the level of competence of healthcare professionals and involving them in research activities, innovation and engagement plans through training and facilitation. It therefore seemed appropriate to define a more structured organisation by outlining new operational guidelines. The most crucial point regarding the management of this journal club was its use only as an internal training tool to improve knowledge on the topic chosen, without providing any concrete continuity to the debates that emerged from the meeting. This limitation may have made our club a purely theoretical tool. However, a critical evaluation highlighted the changes needed to make our club more operational, allowing it to evolve and be updated. Therefore, since 2023, a departmental working group called ‘Journal Club’ has been created, whose primary function is to manage the activities of the journal club.

Journal club subgroups helped mix complementary skills and make them more multidisciplinary

Three facilitators (two research coordinating biologists and a research nurse) with strong skills in encouraging discussion and open debate among participants were identified to coordinate activities, schedule meetings and track the results of each group. It should be noted that other qualified professionals may be involved as facilitators, depending on the expertise required for a specific topic.

Another turning point was the division of the original group of participants into subgroups of approximately 8-10 professionals to make them as multidisciplinary and filled with complementary skills as possible. Three DAIRI multidisciplinary groups were formed based on the number of participants.

• RELATED: Nursing research: how to design an effective survey tool

To date, the schedule of the journal club is divided into cycles, comprising two dedicated meetings for each group. At the end of discussion on the articles selected by all participants in the first meeting, a possible project idea is chosen by the team based on the points of reflection that have emerged. These points will need to be further investigated and will result in the development of a research proposal that can be applied in our field. Two junior researchers are appointed as team leaders at the end of the first meeting of each cycle to encourage them to develop leadership skills that will lead them towards developing new research studies.

‘All the professionals involved in the project are invited to this second journal club meeting to encourage discussion and confrontation’

In the approximately two-month gap between the first and second meetings, each group works on the drafting of the project coordinated by the team leaders, who will have the task of investigating the currently available evidence on the chosen topic, involving the people in the department and among its national and international networks, jointly developing the draft research project. During the drafting of the research project, the team leaders can also benefit from the support of a working group composed of the journal club facilitators and the senior researchers for each departmental structure.

Revised journal club is a catalyst for developing new ideas and collaborations

The progress of the project is then discussed at the second meeting within the same cycle, where strengths and weaknesses and the research protocol are defined, which will then see development and implementation through the guidance of team leaders. All the professionals involved in the project are invited to this second meeting to encourage discussion and confrontation; for this reason, a further change in our journal club was to conduct discussions using the English language to broaden communication and collaboration with international colleagues, fostering more fluid interactions and enriching the research environment previously conducted exclusively in Italian.

Then the next cycle begins with new project ideas and the appointment of new team leaders for implementation. The day of the week and the time are unchanged from the previous version. The facilitators who evaluate the entire project process, from activation to the dissemination of results, monitor the progress of the project. In 2023, 15 research projects were developed using this new version of the journal club, five of which have already been funded and the others are being submitted for funding.

• RELATED: A researcher’s development needs support, skills and expertise of ‘a village'

This revised version of journal club is not limited to merely discussing articles, but is a real catalyst for developing new ideas and creating multidisciplinary collaborations. Thanks to the diversity of skills and viewpoints among the participants, it is possible to address the topics discussed in an enriched and in-depth way. In addition, the realisation of research projects derived from journal club discussions allows participants to pursue original studies and contribute significantly to scientific production in their field of interest.

A platform for updating knowledge and stimulating collaborative research

However, this experience is not isolated but complements a wider debate on continuing education and the implementation of evidence-based medicine. As highlighted in the literature, journal clubs can serve as platforms not only for knowledge updating, but also for stimulating collaborative research (Singh and Yogi 2020, Topf et al 2017). Our approach, characterised by increased interactivity and a focus on practical outcomes, is in line with the recommendations of Eusuf and Shelton (2022), who argue for the importance of an effective journal club in professional education. Furthermore, our experience demonstrates how the development of such clubs can respond to the historical limitations highlighted in the literature, particularly in relation to their theoretical nature and lack of practical application (Mark et al 2021).

‘The participatory, interactive and operational approach of the revised journal club could help to stimulate the production of more scientific studies by encouraging a diversity of perspectives and knowledge sharing among participants’

Our model, which promotes the creation of research proposals during journal club meetings, could strengthen the link between theory and practice, thus contributing to the cultural and professional growth of the participants. The implications of our approach are significant: by encouraging diversity of skills and interdisciplinary collaboration, we not only improve the quality of research, but also create a learning environment that promotes the acquisition of new skills and knowledge in line with Bolgeo et al’s (2023) guidance on supporting research infrastructures in hospitals.

In conclusion, revisiting the journal club as a space for discussion and production of research projects proved to be a positive and fruitful experience. It allowed participants to expand their knowledge, improve their skills and increase the production of innovative research projects. We believe that the participatory, interactive and operational approach of the revised journal club could help to stimulate the production of more scientific studies by encouraging a diversity of perspectives and knowledge sharing among participants.

• RELATED: I am not a ‘clinical academic’, but I am an ‘academic clinician’

We would also suggest that scientific organisations should consider the journal club in a dynamic way, where the theoretical, updating and confrontational aspect finds its direct application in the construction of multidisciplinary and innovative research projects. In this way, it would be possible to monitor the benefits of this instrument quantitatively, perhaps even through specific key performance indicators. We also believe that this approach could be successfully replicated in other academic contexts and settings, representing a valuable opportunity for the growth and development of the scientific community and helping to foster a research culture based on collaboration and innovation.

Further information

• Bolgeo T, Di Matteo R, Betti M, Desperati G, Megna I, Piceni G, Farotto M, Roveta A, Maconi A, Timmins F (2023) The importance of dedicated supportive research infrastructure in the hospital setting to support clinical nursing research and evidence-based practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 79, 12, 4425–4427. doi.org/10.1111/jan.15669
• Eusuf D, Shelton C (2022) Establishing and sustaining an effective journal club. BJA Education, 22, 2, 40–42. doi.org/10.1016/j.bjae.2021.11.001
• Mark I, Sonbol M, Abbasian C (2021) Running a journal club in 2020: reflections and challenges. BJPsych Bulletin, 45, 6, 339–342. doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2020.121
• Singh A, Yogi P (2020) Experience sharing: being a part of the journal club. JNMA, 58, 221, 62–64. doi.org/10.31729/jnma.4845
• Topf JM, Sparks MA, Phelan PJ, Shah N, Lerma EV, Graham-Brown MPM, Madariaga H, Iannuzzella F, Rheault MN, Oates T, Jhaveri KD, Hiremath S (2017). The evolution of the journal club: From Osler to Twitter. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 69, 6, 827–836. doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.12.012

Tatiana Bolgeo is head of Healthcare Professions Research Unit – Research Training Innovation Infrastructure; Roberta Di Matteo is research nurse, Healthcare Professions Research Unit – Research Training Innovation Infrastructure; Carlotta Bertolina is research coordinator, Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Serena Penpa is research coordinator, Clinical Trial Center – Research Training Innovation Infrastructure; Carolina Pelazza is research coordinator, Clinical Trial Center – Research Training Innovation Infrastructure; Iacopo Megna is research coordinator, Grant Office – Research Training Innovation Infrastructure; Costanza Massarino is research coordinator, Translational medicine; Alessia Francese is research coordinator, Research Laboratories; Roberta Libener is senior biologist, Biobank; Antonio Maconi is director – all at the Research and Innovation Department (DAIRI) – Azienda Ospedaliero – Universitaria SS. Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo, Alessandria, Italy;

Fiona Timmins is Professor – School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland