Section of Evidence-Based Mental Health, Health Services and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, UK.
Health Info Libr J. 2009 Dec;26(4):298-306. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00833.x.
Clinicians report difficulties using research in their practices. The aim of the study was to describe needs and preferences for a mental health clinical question-answering service designed to assist this process.
Multi-disciplinary clinicians participated in a focus group; users of the service supplied feedback.
Fifty-four clinicians received answers to 84 questions about mental health treatments. User ratings showed that the answers had multiple uses: informing health care (43), education (22), staff development (28) and research (12), and were considered useful, clear, relevant and helpful. Focus group participants appreciated critically appraised summaries of evidence and stressed the time-saving benefit of the service. Clinicians without a medical training were least confident in applying evidence. Attitudes to research were positive, but concern was expressed about its potential misuse for political purposes. This appeared to arise from an ambiguity around the term 'insufficient evidence', which participants felt is widely misinterpreted as 'evidence of no effect'.
A highly valued, responsive service has been developed. A range of clinicians find critically appraised summaries of research useful. Education about the use of research may help clinicians to be more evidence based.
临床医生报告在实践中使用研究存在困难。本研究旨在描述设计一个心理健康临床问答服务的需求和偏好，以帮助这一过程。
多学科临床医生参加了焦点小组；服务用户提供了反馈。
54 名临床医生收到了 84 个关于心理健康治疗问题的答案。用户评分表明，这些答案有多种用途：告知医疗保健（43）、教育（22）、员工发展（28）和研究（12），并被认为有用、清晰、相关和有帮助。焦点小组参与者赞赏证据的批判性评价摘要，并强调了该服务节省时间的好处。没有医学培训的临床医生在应用证据方面最没有信心。对研究的态度是积极的，但对其可能被滥用于政治目的表示关注。这似乎源于“证据不足”一词的模糊性，参与者认为该词被广泛误解为“没有效果的证据”。
开发了一项非常有价值、响应迅速的服务。一系列临床医生发现研究的批判性评价摘要很有用。关于研究使用的教育可能有助于临床医生更具循证性。
