Literature DB >> 1807700

A study to enhance clinical end-user MEDLINE search skills: design and baseline findings.

K A McKibbon1, R B Haynes, M E Johnston, C J Walker.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if a preceptor and timely, individualized feedback improves the performance of physicians in searching MEDLINE using GRATEFUL MED in clinical settings.
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial.
SETTING: A 300 bed primary to tertiary care teaching hospital. Computers were installed in wards and clinics of 6 major clinical services, and the emergency room, intensive care and neonatal intensive care units.
SUBJECTS: All physicians and physicians-in-training from the departments of Medicine, Family Medicine, Surgery, Psychiatry, Pediatrics, and Obstetrics and Gynecology were included if they made patient care decisions for at least 8 weeks during the study period. INTERVENTION: All participants were given a 1-hour training class and 1 hour of individualized searching with 1 of the 2 study librarians. After training, participants were randomized to a control group who received no further intervention or to an intervention group in which each person chose a clinical preceptor experienced in MEDLINE searching and received individualized feedback by a study librarian on their first 10 searches, indicating search quality and providing suggestions for improvement. Feedback was mailed the first week day after the search was done. MAIN MEASURES: Baseline characteristics by study group, department and level of training, study participation rates, and searching rates. MAIN
RESULTS: 308 of 392 eligible physicians joined the study. Participation was almost 80% with some variation by department and level of training. Excellent balance in the baseline characteristics was achieved for the 2 groups, as well as for the number who did first searches. Intervention group participants searched MEDLINE more often than did controls (3.5 searches per month vs 2.5 per month for controls, P = 0.046). The recall and precision for first searches for both groups was significantly less than that of librarians. The analysis of study data will be completed by September 1991.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians are willing to do self-service searching of MEDLINE in clinical settings but their precision and recall are less than a trained librarian at baseline. Search skills enhancements are needed and the effect of feedback and preceptors is being tested. SOURCE OF FUNDING: U.S. National Library of Medicine and Ontario Ministry of Health.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1807700      PMCID: PMC2247498     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care        ISSN: 0195-4210


  13 in total

1.  Observations of end-user online searching behavior over eleven years.

Authors:  W Sewell; S Teitelbaum
Journal:  J Am Soc Inf Sci       Date:  1986-07

2.  End-user training: does it make a difference?

Authors:  J G Marshall
Journal:  Med Ref Serv Q       Date:  1989

3.  Rapid evolution of microcomputer use in a faculty of health sciences.

Authors:  R B Haynes; K A McKibbon; C J Walker; M F Ramsden
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1991-01-01       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Problems encountered by clinical end users of MEDLINE and GRATEFUL MED.

Authors:  C J Walker; K A McKibbon; R B Haynes; M F Ramsden
Journal:  Bull Med Libr Assoc       Date:  1991-01

5.  Bibliographic retrieval: a survey of individual users of MEDLINE.

Authors:  K T Wallingford; B L Humphreys; N E Selinger; E R Siegel
Journal:  MD Comput       Date:  1990 May-Jun

6.  On-line literature retrieval as a continuing medical education course.

Authors:  M Bowen
Journal:  Bull Med Libr Assoc       Date:  1977-07

7.  Teaching clinicians to search MEDLINE: description and evaluation of a short course.

Authors:  K A McKibbon; R B Haynes; L M Baker; T Flemming; C Walker
Journal:  Res Med Educ       Date:  1986

8.  End-user searching in medicine.

Authors:  E H Poisson
Journal:  Bull Med Libr Assoc       Date:  1986-10

9.  An evaluation of four end-user systems for searching MEDLINE.

Authors:  M D Bonham; L L Nelson
Journal:  Bull Med Libr Assoc       Date:  1988-01

10.  How good are clinical MEDLINE searches? A comparative study of clinical end-user and librarian searches.

Authors:  K A McKibbon; R B Haynes; C J Dilks; M F Ramsden; N C Ryan; L Baker; T Flemming; D Fitzgerald
Journal:  Comput Biomed Res       Date:  1990-12
View more
  5 in total

1.  Finding the evidence: teaching medical residents to search MEDLINE.

Authors:  Eric W Vogel; Kevin R Block; Karen T Wallingford
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2002-07

Review 2.  Effects of librarian-provided services in healthcare settings: a systematic review.

Authors:  Laure Perrier; Ann Farrell; A Patricia Ayala; David Lightfoot; Tim Kenny; Ellen Aaronson; Nancy Allee; Tara Brigham; Elizabeth Connor; Teodora Constantinescu; Joanne Muellenbach; Helen-Ann Brown Epstein; Ardis Weiss
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 3.  Interventions for promoting information and communication technologies adoption in healthcare professionals.

Authors:  Marie-Pierre Gagnon; France Légaré; Michel Labrecque; Pierre Frémont; Pierre Pluye; Johanne Gagnon; Josip Car; Claudia Pagliari; Marie Desmartis; Lucile Turcot; Karine Gravel
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-01-21

4.  A tutorial on information retrieval: basic terms and concepts.

Authors:  Wei Zhou; Neil R Smalheiser; Clement Yu
Journal:  J Biomed Discov Collab       Date:  2006-03-13

5.  Analysis of PubMed User Sessions Using a Full-Day PubMed Query Log: A Comparison of Experienced and Nonexperienced PubMed Users.

Authors:  Illhoi Yoo; Abu Saleh Mohammad Mosa
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2015-07-02
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.