Cohen S J, Weinberger M, Mazzuca S A, McDonald C J
Soc Sci Med. 1982;16(14):1361-4. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(82)90032-6.
To determine the extent to which different sources of information are perceived to influence common medical decisions, 10 interns, 22 senior residents and 9 faculty general internists rated the degree of influence of house staff, general internists, subspecialists, conferences, journal reading and past experience on their decisions concerning primary prevention (vaccination), secondary prevention (screening) and drug therapy. Analysis of variance of their questionnaire data supports the following conclusions: physicians at different stages of training rely on different sources of information; as physicians advance in training the influence of generalists wanes while that of subspecialists increases; subspecialists and past experience are perceived as primarily affecting therapeutic decisions; primary prevention appears least subject to influence by prevailing information sources; and the preference for reading begins early and increases as physicians advance in training. These data suggest that designing effective medical education requires considering the level of the physician's training and the nature of the medical decision.
为了确定不同信息来源在多大程度上被认为会影响常见的医疗决策，10名实习生、22名高级住院医师和9名内科普通科教员对住院医师、内科普通科医师、专科医师、会议、期刊阅读和既往经验对他们关于一级预防（疫苗接种）、二级预防（筛查）和药物治疗决策的影响程度进行了评分。对他们问卷数据的方差分析支持以下结论：处于不同培训阶段的医生依赖不同的信息来源；随着医生培训的推进，全科医生的影响力减弱，而专科医生的影响力增加；专科医生和既往经验被认为主要影响治疗决策；一级预防似乎最不容易受到主流信息来源的影响；对阅读的偏好很早就开始了，并且随着医生培训的推进而增加。这些数据表明，设计有效的医学教育需要考虑医生的培训水平和医疗决策的性质。
