Teaching Journal Club Presentations: Beyond the Original Article

Many EMP teachers probably include the ability to read original research articles in English among their learning objectives. But what exactly do we teach students when we ask them to read a research article?

At the International University of Health and Welfare (IUHW) School of Medicine, our second-year medical students give a Journal Club Presentation in English. Each student chooses an original article from The New England Journal of Medicine and presents it in 15 minutes, following a 10-step format that we provide.

However, they cannot choose just any article. I ask them to select one that has both an Editorial and Correspondence associated with it.

Over the years, I have taught Medical English to many Japanese medical students and physicians, and I have noticed a common pattern. After introducing the Abstract, they often move on to the Tables and Figures.

The reason is simple: there is less English to read!

Instead of spending too much time on Tables and Figures, I ask my students to read the Discussion of the original article, as well as its Editorial, Correspondence, and Conference Report. These additional sources help them understand the original article more deeply and from different perspectives.

Here is how we do it.

After the Abstract, Read the Discussion

Original articles usually follow the familiar IMRaD structure:

Introduction: Why?

Methods: How?

Results: What?

Discussion: So what?

We naturally start with the Abstract. But after that, I ask students to go to the Discussion, rather than moving directly to the Tables and Figures.

A Discussion usually consists of several paragraphs covering four main elements:

1. Summary of the results

2. Interpretation of the results

3. Limitations of the study

4. Conclusions

The first paragraph, which summarizes the results, often overlaps with the Results section of the Abstract. Similarly, the final paragraph usually corresponds closely to the Conclusions in the Abstract.

So, if students have already understood the Abstract, they do not need to spend much time on the first and last paragraphs of the Discussion.

Instead, I ask them to focus on the interpretation of the results, usually discussed in the middle paragraphs, and the limitations of the study, often found toward the end.

In other words, I want them to find out not only what the researchers found, but how the authors interpret their findings and what they see as the limitations of their study.

Use the Editorial to Understand Why the Study Matters

The next thing I ask students to read is the Editorial.

An Editorial is usually written by an expert in the field and comments on an original article published in the journal. Reading the Editorial can help students understand something that may not be obvious from the original article itself: the significance of the study within its field.

This is one reason I ask students to choose an original article that has an accompanying Editorial.

Again, they do not need to read every sentence. An Editorial is often about two pages long, and the author’s assessment of the significance of the study can often be found in the final or penultimate paragraph.

So I tell students to look there first and ask:

Why is this original article important in this field?

The original article tells them what the researchers did and found. The Editorial helps them see how the study fits into the broader field.

Use Correspondence to See What Other Researchers Think

I also require students to choose an article that has related Correspondence.

Correspondence usually consists of letters to the editor about a previously published article, together with an author’s reply. Because the letters are often written by researchers working in the same field, they provide a useful opportunity to see the original article from another perspective.

Before looking closely at the content of each letter, however, I ask students to consider another question:

Why did the editors choose to publish this particular letter?

Journals receive many letters, but only some are selected for publication. Thinking about why a particular letter was selected helps students consider what aspects of the original article the editors thought were worth further discussion.

I then ask students to classify each letter broadly as positive or negative toward the conclusions of the original article.

After that, they look at two questions:

What did the other researchers question or comment on?
How did the original authors respond?

Correspondence may also refer to similar studies. By reading both the letters and the authors’ replies, students can begin to see how the original article relates to other research in the field.

So, when we read Correspondence, the sequence is roughly:

Why did the editors select this letter?

Is it broadly positive or negative?

What issue does it raise?

How do the original authors respond?

This makes Correspondence much more manageable, even for second-year medical students.

Use a Conference Report to Hear More from the Authors

Finally, I ask students to look for a Conference Report.

Original articles published in major international medical journals are often presented at large international conferences before publication. Reports of these presentations may include comments made by the researchers themselves.

The language of a published article is, quite appropriately, formal and cautious. In a conference presentation or interview, however, researchers may speak more openly about what surprised them, what they consider particularly important, or what they think should happen next.

I sometimes describe this to my students as looking for the authors’ “honne” – their more personal thoughts about the study.

Today, Conference Reports are not the only place to find this kind of information. Researchers increasingly discuss their work in videos, interviews, podcasts, and social media. These sources are, of course, different from peer-reviewed evidence, but they may reveal the human side of the research that is difficult to find in the published article.

Bringing a comment like this into a Journal Club can also make what might otherwise be a rather dry presentation much more interesting.

The 10 Steps We Use at IUHW

Putting all of this together, our students use the following 10 steps for their Journal Club Presentation:

1. Examining the Title

2. Examining the Author Affiliations

3. Examining the Conclusions

4. Determining the Original Contribution – Background

5. Evaluating the Methods – Identifying the Research Question through PICO/PECO

6. Evaluating the Results

7. Evaluating the Discussion – Interpretation and Limitations

8. Evaluating the Value of the Article – Editorial

9. Evaluating Similar Studies – Correspondence

10. Evaluating the Impact on the Community – Conference Report

The presentation is limited to 15 minutes.

There is simply not enough time to explain every Table, Figure, and statistical result. Students have to decide what is important and what can be left out.

Can Second-Year Medical Students Really Do This?

Yes, they can.

Of course, I do not expect second-year students to understand every statistical method or every sentence in an Editorial. What matters is giving them a clear structure for reading and telling them what to look for.

Generative AI has also made this much easier. Students can use AI to help them understand unfamiliar terminology, study designs, statistics, and difficult English sentences. I think we should make good use of it.

But using AI to understand what the article says is only the first step.

I want students to go further and find out how the authors interpret their findings, why the study matters in its field, how other researchers respond to it, and what the researchers themselves consider important.

What I find most encouraging is that students have told me that this approach makes them less reluctant to read medical articles in English. Some have even said that they have started to enjoy reading them.

If you already use original articles in your EMP classes, you might try going a little further than the Abstract, Tables, and Figures.

Read the Discussion. Find the Editorial. Look at the Correspondence. And see if you can find a Conference Report.

These additional sources can help students see an original article from several different perspectives – and may make Journal Club presentations more interesting as well.

AI Disclosure

Generative AI was used to assist with language editing during the preparation of this article. The author reviewed and revised the manuscript and is responsible for the final content.