Hurst Dominic, Mickan Sharon
Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Implement Sci. 2017 Mar 14;12(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0564-1.
Implementation science seeks to promote the uptake of research and other evidence-based findings into practice, but for healthcare professionals, this is complex as practice draws on, in addition to scientific principles, rules of thumb and a store of practical wisdom acquired from a range of informational and experiential sources. The aims of this review were to identify sources of information and professional experiences encountered by healthcare workers and from this to build a classification system, for use in future observational studies, that describes influences on how healthcare professionals acquire and use information in their clinical practice.
This was a mixed studies systematic review of observational studies.
OVID MEDLINE and Embase and Google Scholar were searched using terms around information, knowledge or evidence and sharing, searching and utilisation combined with terms relating to healthcare groups.
Studies were eligible if one of the intentions was to identify information or experiential encounters by healthcare workers.
Data was extracted by one author after piloting with another.
Studies were assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).
The primary outcome extracted was the information source or professional experience encounter.
Similar encounters were grouped together as single constructs. Our synthesis involved a mixed approach using the top-down logic of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification System (BC2) to generate classification categories and a bottom-up approach to develop descriptive codes (or "facets") for each category, from the data. The generic terms of BC2 were customised by an iterative process of thematic content analysis. Facets were developed by using available theory and keeping in mind the pragmatic end use of the classification.
Eighty studies were included from which 178 discreet knowledge encounters were extracted. Six classification categories were developed: what information or experience was encountered; how was the information or experience encountered; what was the mode of encounter; from whom did the information originate or with whom was the experience; how many participants were there; and where did the encounter take place. For each of these categories, relevant descriptive facets were identified.
We have sought to identify and classify all knowledge encounters, and we have developed a faceted description of key categories which will support richer descriptions and interrogations of knowledge encounters in healthcare research.
实施科学旨在促进将研究及其他基于证据的研究成果应用于实践，但对于医疗保健专业人员而言，这一过程较为复杂，因为实践不仅依赖科学原则，还借鉴经验法则以及从一系列信息和经验来源中获取的实用智慧。本综述的目的是识别医护人员所遇到的信息来源和专业经验，并据此构建一个分类系统，供未来的观察性研究使用，该系统可描述对医护人员在临床实践中获取和使用信息方式的影响。
这是一项对观察性研究的混合研究系统综述。
使用围绕信息、知识或证据以及共享、搜索和利用的术语，并结合与医疗保健群体相关的术语，对OVID MEDLINE、Embase和谷歌学术进行搜索。
如果研究目的之一是识别医护人员的信息或经验性接触，则该研究符合纳入标准。
一名作者在与另一名作者进行预试验后提取数据。
使用混合方法评估工具（MMAT）对研究进行评估。
提取的主要结果是信息来源或专业经验接触。
将相似的接触归为单一结构。我们的综合采用了一种混合方法，即使用布利斯书目分类系统（BC2）的自上而下逻辑生成分类类别，并采用自下而上的方法从数据中为每个类别开发描述性代码（或“方面”）。通过主题内容分析的迭代过程对BC2的通用术语进行了定制。通过运用现有理论并考虑分类的实际最终用途来开发方面。
纳入了80项研究，从中提取了178次离散的知识接触。开发了六个分类类别：遇到了什么信息或经验；如何遇到该信息或经验；接触的方式是什么；信息源自何人或与何人有该经验；有多少参与者；以及接触发生在哪里。针对每个类别，确定了相关的描述性方面。
我们试图识别并分类所有知识接触，并对关键类别进行了多方面描述，这将有助于在医疗保健研究中对知识接触进行更丰富的描述和探究。
Zotero 插件