Journal Club
Evidence debate, not just evidence presentation.
A structured async EBM journal club where half the group defends an intervention and half refutes it — then the group meets to reconcile the evidence together.
How it works
Pose a clinical question
Enter a specific clinical question. The system converts it to a PICO framework and auto-assigns participants to supporting or refuting positions.
Find an article & complete the worksheet
Each participant finds a study from their assigned position, enters the PubMed ID, and completes an Evidence-Based Reasoning Worksheet. AI pre-fills study design, key findings, bias risks, and confounders — the student validates and adds their reasoning.
Receive the Moderator Packet
Before the session, the instructor receives an AI-generated summary: points of agreement, key tensions between studies, methodological concerns, and suggested discussion questions — without needing to read every paper.
Meet and deliberate
The actual discussion happens in person or via Zoom/Teams. Participants bring their worksheets; the moderator guides the group to a final evidence-based answer.
Record the consensus
After the session, the moderator enters the group's consensus answer and certainty rating. Optionally publish to the Evidence Commons — a growing, searchable database of EBM Q&A built by clinician-educators.
Why the pro/con format?
Assigning half the group to find refuting evidence forces every participant to steelman the opposing view — the most effective critical appraisal skill in clinical practice. Evidence is rarely one-sided, and real patient decisions require holding contradictory studies in tension before reaching a defensible conclusion.
This format also surfaces the exact tensions a good moderator needs to highlight. When an RCT and a cohort study reach opposite conclusions, the group must ask why — and the answer is usually the most important methodological lesson of the session.
Contributing to the Evidence Commons
After each session, instructors can opt to publish their clinical question and consensus answer to the Evidence Commons — a shared, searchable repository of evidence-based Q&A built by clinician-educators. Every entry carries the studies, GRADE certainty ratings, and group reasoning behind the answer. Not an AI-generated summary — a human-deliberated one.