Gorman P N, Ash J, Wykoff L
Providence Medical Center, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland 97201-3098.
Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1994 Apr;82(2):140-6.
Medical librarians and informatics professionals believe the medical journal literature can be useful in clinical practice, but evidence suggests that practicing physicians do not share this belief. The authors designed a study to determine whether a random sample of "native" questions asked by primary care practitioners could be answered using the journal literature. Participants included forty-nine active, nonacademic primary care physicians providing ambulatory care in rural and nonrural Oregon, and seven medical librarians. The study was conducted in three stages: (1) office interviews with physicians to record clinical questions; (2) online searches to locate answers to selected questions; and (3) clinician feedback regarding the relevance and usefulness of the information retrieved. Of 295 questions recorded during forty-nine interviews, 60 questions were selected at random for searches. The average total time spent searching for and selecting articles for each question was forty-three minutes. The average cost per question searched was $27.37. Clinician feedback was received for 48 of 56 questions (four physicians could not be located, so their questions were not used in tabulating the results). For 28 questions (56%), clinicians judged the material relevant; for 22 questions (46%) the information provided a "clear answer" to their question. They expected the information would have had an impact on their patient in nineteen (40%) cases, and an impact on themselves or their practice in twenty-four (51%) cases. If the results can be generalized, and if the time and cost of performing searches can be reduced, increased use of the journal literature could significantly improve the extent to which primary care physicians' information needs are met.
医学图书馆员和信息学专业人员认为医学期刊文献在临床实践中可能有用,但证据表明执业医师并不认同这一观点。作者设计了一项研究,以确定能否利用期刊文献回答基层医疗从业者随机提出的“原生”问题。参与者包括49名在俄勒冈州农村和非农村地区提供门诊护理的在职非学术基层医疗医生,以及7名医学图书馆员。该研究分三个阶段进行:(1)与医生进行办公室访谈以记录临床问题;(2)在线搜索以找到所选问题的答案;(3)临床医生对检索到的信息的相关性和有用性进行反馈。在49次访谈中记录的295个问题中,随机选择了60个问题进行搜索。为每个问题搜索和选择文章平均总共花费43分钟。每个搜索问题的平均成本为27.37美元。对56个问题中的48个收到了临床医生的反馈(有4名医生无法联系到,因此他们的问题未用于结果统计)。对于28个问题(56%),临床医生认为资料相关;对于22个问题(46%),所提供的信息为他们的问题提供了“明确答案”。他们预计这些信息会在19例(40%)中对其患者产生影响,在24例(51%)中对他们自己或他们的医疗实践产生影响。如果结果可以推广,如果进行搜索的时间和成本能够降低,那么增加对期刊文献的使用可以显著提高满足基层医疗医生信息需求的程度。