OBJECTIVE: To describe the obstacles encountered when attempting to answer doctors' questions with evidence. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING: General practices in Iowa. PARTICIPANTS: 9 academic generalist doctors, 14 family doctors, and 2 medical librarians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A taxonomy of obstacles encountered while searching for evidence based answers to doctors' questions. RESULTS: 59 obstacles were encountered and organised according to the five steps in asking and answering questions: recognise a gap in knowledge, formulate a question, search for relevant information, formulate an answer, and use the answer to direct patient care. Six obstacles were considered particularly salient by the investigators and practising doctors: the excessive time required to find information; difficulty modifying the original question, which was often vague and open to interpretation; difficulty selecting an optimal strategy to search for information; failure of a seemingly appropriate resource to cover the topic; uncertainty about how to know when all the relevant evidence has been found so that the search can stop; and inadequate synthesis of multiple bits of evidence into a clinically useful statement. CONCLUSIONS: Many obstacles are encountered when asking and answering questions about how to care for patients. Addressing these obstacles could lead to better patient care by improving clinically oriented information resources.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the obstacles encountered when attempting to answer doctors' questions with evidence. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING: General practices in Iowa. PARTICIPANTS: 9 academic generalist doctors, 14 family doctors, and 2 medical librarians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A taxonomy of obstacles encountered while searching for evidence based answers to doctors' questions. RESULTS: 59 obstacles were encountered and organised according to the five steps in asking and answering questions: recognise a gap in knowledge, formulate a question, search for relevant information, formulate an answer, and use the answer to direct patient care. Six obstacles were considered particularly salient by the investigators and practising doctors: the excessive time required to find information; difficulty modifying the original question, which was often vague and open to interpretation; difficulty selecting an optimal strategy to search for information; failure of a seemingly appropriate resource to cover the topic; uncertainty about how to know when all the relevant evidence has been found so that the search can stop; and inadequate synthesis of multiple bits of evidence into a clinically useful statement. CONCLUSIONS: Many obstacles are encountered when asking and answering questions about how to care for patients. Addressing these obstacles could lead to better patient care by improving clinically oriented information resources.
Authors: S J Sontag; B I Hirschowitz; S Holt; M G Robinson; J Behar; M M Berenson; A McCullough; A F Ippoliti; J E Richter; G Ahtaridis Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1992-01 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: J A Osheroff; D E Forsythe; B G Buchanan; R A Bankowitz; B H Blumenfeld; R A Miller Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1991-04-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: J G Hatlebakk; A Berstad; L Carling; L E Svedberg; P Unge; P Ekström; L Halvorsen; A Stallemo; N Hovdenak; R Trondstad Journal: Scand J Gastroenterol Date: 1993-03 Impact factor: 2.423
Authors: Salimah Z Shariff; Jessica M Sontrop; R Brian Haynes; Arthur V Iansavichus; K Ann McKibbon; Nancy L Wilczynski; Matthew A Weir; Mark R Speechley; Amardeep Thind; Amit X Garg Journal: CMAJ Date: 2012-01-16 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Monika Kastner; Nancy L Wilczynski; Ann K McKibbon; Amit X Garg; R Brian Haynes Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2009-02-20 Impact factor: 6.437