Literature DB >> 16926949

Contextual factors in clinical decision making: national survey of Canadian family physicians.

C Shawn Tracy1, Guilherme Coelho Dantas, Rahim Moineddin, Ross E G Upshur.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Many factors are at play in the process of clinical decision making, but to date, the interaction of these factors has not been well understood. Such information could have important implications for teaching and promoting evidence-based medicine (EBM) in primary care. This study was designed to explore the relationship between physician-related variables and management of patient-related contextual factors in clinical decision making. A secondary objective was to examine the extent to which this relationship varies by type of clinical decision.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional randomized postal survey of 1134 Canadian primary care physicians stratified by age, sex, and practice location. Nonrespondents were sent reminders at 4 weeks and again at 8 weeks; at 12 weeks, all remaining nonrespondents were mailed replacement copies of the questionnaire.
SETTING: Family practices in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Of the final sample of 431 family physicians, 52% were men, 63% practised in urban locations, and 71% were in group practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported likelihood of considering various contextual factors during the course of clinical decision making.
RESULTS: Despite the three follow-up mailings, the final response rate was 42%; however, nonrespondents did not differ significantly from respondents on three important demographic factors: age, sex, and practice location. Using multinomial logistic regression analysis, the data showed that female family physicians and practitioners less strongly identified with EBM were more likely to consider contextual factors in clinical decision making. The effect was more obvious for ordering tests than for decisions about treatment.
CONCLUSION: The evolving model of EBM should consider important physician-related variables in clinical decision making. Our data indicate that physicians' sex and identification with the tenets of EBM influence management of contextual factors. These results have important implications because they indicate that clinicians strongly identified with the EBM model of clinical practice are less sensitive to context, which might be an obstacle to efforts to integrate patient values and clinical circumstances into patient-centred care. We believe these findings support continued development of the model of "context-sensitive medicine" previously proposed as an alternative to EBM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16926949      PMCID: PMC1479511     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  24 in total

1.  Not another questionnaire! Maximizing the response rate, predicting non-response and assessing non-response bias in postal questionnaire studies of GPs.

Authors:  Stephen Barclay; Chris Todd; Ilora Finlay; Gunn Grande; Penny Wyatt
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.267

2.  Evidence-based care and the case for intuition and tacit knowledge in clinical assessment and decision making in mental health nursing practice: an empirical contribution to the debate.

Authors:  I Welsh; C M Lyons
Journal:  J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.952

3.  Physician gender effects in medical communication: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  Debra L Roter; Judith A Hall; Yutaka Aoki
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-08-14       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  If not evidence, then what? Or does medicine really need a base?

Authors:  Ross E G Upshur
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.431

5.  Physicians' and patients' choices in evidence based practice.

Authors:  R Brian Haynes; P J Devereaux; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-06-08

6.  Application of evidence from randomised controlled trials to general practice.

Authors:  W W Rosser
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-02-20       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 7.  Understanding why we agree on the evidence but disagree on the medicine.

Authors:  G D Rubenfeld
Journal:  Respir Care       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.258

Review 8.  The limits of evidence-based medicine.

Authors:  M R Tonelli
Journal:  Respir Care       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.258

9.  Individualizing treatment decisions. The likelihood of being helped or harmed.

Authors:  Sharon E Straus
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.651

Review 10.  Medical communication and gender: a summary of research.

Authors:  J A Hall; D L Roter
Journal:  J Gend Specif Med       Date:  1998 Oct-Nov
View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Non-clinical influences on clinical decision-making: a major challenge to evidence-based practice.

Authors:  F M Hajjaj; M S Salek; M K A Basra; A Y Finlay
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  The Frontera Collaboration: a preliminary report of health sciences librarians promoting evidence-based practice in U.S.-Mexico border communities.

Authors:  Keith W Cogdill; Lorely Ambriz; Brooke L Billman; Kathleen V Carter; Barbara Nail-Chiwetalu; Julie M Trumble; Yamila M El-Khayat; Annabelle V Nuñez
Journal:  Med Ref Serv Q       Date:  2012

3.  Effect of clinical spectrum, inoculum size and physician characteristics on sensitivity of a rapid antigen detection test for group A streptococcal pharyngitis.

Authors:  J F Cohen; M Chalumeau; C Levy; P Bidet; M Benani; M Koskas; E Bingen; R Cohen
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 3.267

4.  Integration of evidence based medicine into the clinical years of a medical curriculum.

Authors:  Mazen Ferwana; Ibrahim A Alwan; Mohamed A Moamary; Mohi E Magzoub; Hani M Tamim
Journal:  J Family Community Med       Date:  2012-05

Review 5.  Perceived difficulty and appropriateness of decision making by General Practitioners: a systematic review of scenario studies.

Authors:  Nicola McCleary; Craig R Ramsay; Jill J Francis; Marion K Campbell; Julia Allan
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 6.  A real-world approach to Evidence-Based Medicine in general practice: a competency framework derived from a systematic review and Delphi process.

Authors:  Kevin Galbraith; Alison Ward; Carl Heneghan
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-05-03       Impact factor: 2.463

7.  Norwegian physicians' knowledge of and opinions about evidence-based medicine: cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Lidziya Vanahel Ulvenes; Olaf Aasland; Magne Nylenna; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-11-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.