Literature DB >> 26629973

Evidence-Based Practice Point-of-Care Resources: A Quantitative Evaluation of Quality, Rigor, and Content.

Jared M Campbell1, Kandiah Umapathysivam1, Yifan Xue1, Craig Lockwood2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians and other healthcare professionals need access to summaries of evidence-based information in order to provide effective care to their patients at the point-of-care. Evidence-based practice (EBP) point-of-care resources have been developed and are available online to meet this need. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive list of available EBP point-of-care resources and evaluate their processes and policies for the development of content, in order to provide a critical analysis based upon rigor, transparency and measures of editorial quality to inform healthcare providers and promote quality improvement amongst publishers of EBP resources.
DESIGN: A comprehensive and systematic search (Pubmed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central) was undertaken to identify available EBP point-of-care resources, defined as "web-based medical compendia specifically designed to deliver predigested, rapidly accessible, comprehensive, periodically updated, and evidence-based information (and possibly also guidance) to clinicians." MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A pair of investigators independently extracted information on general characteristics, content presentation, editorial quality, evidence-based methodology, and breadth and volume.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven summary resources were identified, of which 22 met the predefined inclusion criteria for EBP point-of-care resources, and 20 could be accessed for description and assessment. Overall, the upper quartile of EBP point-of-care providers was assessed to be UpToDate, Nursing Reference Centre, Mosby's Nursing Consult, BMJ Best Practice, and JBI COnNECT+. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: The choice of which EBP point-of-care resources are suitable for an organization is a decision that depends heavily on the unique requirements of that organization and the resources it has available. However, the results presented in this study should enable healthcare providers to make that assessment in a clear, evidence-based manner, and provide a comprehensive list of the available options.
© 2015 Sigma Theta Tau International.

Entities:  

Keywords:  editorial policies; evidence-based medicine; evidence-based nursing; evidence-based practice; online systems; point-of-care systems

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26629973     DOI: 10.1111/wvn.12114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Worldviews Evid Based Nurs        ISSN: 1545-102X            Impact factor:   2.931


  5 in total

1.  Mobilising computable biomedical knowledge: challenges for clinical decision support from a medical knowledge provider.

Authors:  Kieran Walsh; Chris Wroe
Journal:  BMJ Health Care Inform       Date:  2020-07

2.  Clinical Teaching: An Evidence-based Guide to Best Practices from the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors.

Authors:  Sreeja Natesan; John Bailitz; Andrew King; Sara M Krzyzaniak; Sarah K Kennedy; Albert J Kim; Richard Byyny; Michael Gottlieb
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2020-07-03

3.  Point-of-care tools to support optometric care provision to people with age-related macular degeneration: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  Sena A Gocuk; Allison M McKendrick; Laura E Downie
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 3.992

4.  Accuracy and Effects of Clinical Decision Support Systems Integrated With BMJ Best Practice-Aided Diagnosis: Interrupted Time Series Study.

Authors:  Liyuan Tao; Chen Zhang; Lin Zeng; Shengrong Zhu; Nan Li; Wei Li; Hua Zhang; Yiming Zhao; Siyan Zhan; Hong Ji
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2020-01-20

Review 5.  Tools to Assess the Trustworthiness of Evidence-Based Point-of-Care Information for Health Care Professionals: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Gerlinde Lenaerts; Geertruida E Bekkering; Martine Goossens; Leen De Coninck; Nicolas Delvaux; Sam Cordyn; Jef Adriaenssens; Patrick Vankrunkelsven
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 5.428

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.