School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
Implement Sci. 2019 Mar 1;14(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0854-x.
Medical professionals have access to a broad range of resources to address clinical information needs. While much attention is given to new sources of data such as those available on the internet, it is less clear how clinicians choose between peer-reviewed research literature and other publication-based sources. This analysis distinguishes between possible drivers of publication type preference (namely, practice setting, advanced training, professional development experiences). Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN) are the population for this study. Theories of human and intellectual capital and institutional logics theory are used to understand how advanced training and other clinical experiences may explain the choices that dentists make when faced with clinical questions.
An online questionnaire was implemented with general dentists in the US National Dental PBRN. A series of logistic and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression models were used to explain the use of peer-reviewed and other publications. Measures of knowledge-based human capital distinctions (advanced clinical training and research engagement, advanced professional status, personal motivation for professional advancement) were used to explain preferences for research literature as a clinical resource.
General dentists with advanced training, as well as those with a skill advancement motivation, show a preference for peer-reviewed materials. General dentists who have been practicing longer tend to favor other dental publications, preferring those sources as a resource when faced with clinical challenges. Human capital and professional motivation distinguish the information preferences among general dentists. Further, these factors explain more variance in use of peer-reviewed materials than practice setting does. Few differences by demographic groups were evident.
Results point to a distinct variation in the general dentistry professional community. Advanced training among general dentists, as well as the types of procedures typically conducted in their practice, distinguishes their information preferences from other general dentists, including those with more years of clinical experience.
医疗专业人员可以利用广泛的资源来满足临床信息需求。虽然人们非常关注互联网上提供的新数据源，但对于临床医生如何在同行评议的研究文献和其他基于出版物的资源之间进行选择，关注较少。本分析区分了可能影响出版物类型偏好的驱动因素（即实践环境、高级培训、专业发展经历）。本研究的对象是参与国家牙科实践为基础的研究网络（PBRN）的牙医。人类和智力资本理论以及制度逻辑理论用于理解高级培训和其他临床经验如何解释牙医在面对临床问题时做出的选择。
在美国国家牙科 PBRN 中，对普通牙医进行了在线问卷调查。使用一系列逻辑回归和普通最小二乘法（OLS）回归模型来解释同行评议和其他出版物的使用情况。知识型人力资本区分（高级临床培训和研究参与、高级专业地位、个人专业发展动机）的衡量标准用于解释将研究文献作为临床资源的偏好。
具有高级培训的普通牙医，以及具有技能提升动机的普通牙医，更倾向于选择同行评议的材料。从业时间较长的普通牙医往往更喜欢其他牙科出版物，在面临临床挑战时更倾向于将这些来源作为资源。人力资本和专业动机可以区分普通牙医的信息偏好。此外，这些因素比实践环境更能解释对同行评议材料的使用差异。不同的人口统计学群体之间几乎没有差异。
结果表明普通牙医群体存在明显的差异。普通牙医的高级培训，以及他们在实践中通常进行的手术类型，将他们的信息偏好与其他普通牙医区分开来，包括那些临床经验更丰富的牙医。
