With the first Twitter Journal Club taking place this evening (8pm UK time / 7pm GMT), I thought I would outline some of the practical aspects of how we intend things to run. The intention is for the discussion to last somewhere between one and two hours, but do feel free to drop by and leave whenever.
This may all be a little obvious for those who participate in Twitter chats regularly, but please bear with me.
Every tweet you post in the discussion should be tagged with #TwitJC, otherwise it won’t get picked up by people following the hashtag. In my personal experience, this is easy to forget, so if you use a client that automatically adds the tag, then that’s great. I’ve used TweetChat in the past, though I’m sure other clients exist. If you log into TweetChat using your Twitter account, then type in the hashtag at the top, you can see every tweet from the discussion tagged with #TwitJC, and can respond via Twitter from within TweetChat.
Alternatively, if you just want to read the discussion, you can do so on TweetChat without needing to log in, or just by searching #TwitJC on Twitter.
So this evening, myself and Natalie (@silv24) will introduce the talk. It’s nice if everyone participating then writes a tweet saying a little bit about themselves (student/doctor/what grade?/interests/etc.) at the beginning, so we know who’s joining us.
We’ll then go through the paper using the NHS’s “Solutions for Public Health” Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Tool for Randomised Controlled Trials, details of which can be found here on their website. In essence, it’s a ten-step guide to evaluating an RCT, which we hope will help guide and structure the discussion. Many thanks to @lou_hurst for bringing this to our attention.
Natalie will publish a post a bit before we start outlining key points about the paper, although ideally it’s better if people try and read it themselves beforehand. The full PDF can be found here.