Limits...
Do family physicians retrieve synopses of clinical research previously read as email alerts?

Grad R, Pluye P, Johnson-Lafleur J, Granikov V, Shulha M, Bartlett G, Marlow B - J. Med. Internet Res. (2011)

Bottom Line: Over a period of 341 days, 194 unique synopses delivered to 41 participants resulted in 4937 synopsis readings.However, dyads also occurred serendipitously.Our findings help us to better understand the effect of push on pull and to improve the integration of research-based information within electronic resources for clinicians.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Information Technology Primary Care Research Group, Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. roland.grad@mcgill.ca

ABSTRACT

Background: A synopsis of new clinical research highlights important aspects of one study in a brief structured format. When delivered as email alerts, synopses enable clinicians to become aware of new developments relevant for practice. Once read, a synopsis can become a known item of clinical information. In time-pressured situations, remembering a known item may facilitate information retrieval by the clinician. However, exactly how synopses first delivered as email alerts influence retrieval at some later time is not known.

Objectives: We examined searches for clinical information in which a synopsis previously read as an email alert was retrieved (defined as a dyad). Our study objectives were to (1) examine whether family physicians retrieved synopses they previously read as email alerts and then to (2) explore whether family physicians purposefully retrieved these synopses.

Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study in which a qualitative multiple case study explored the retrieval of email alerts within a prospective longitudinal cohort of practicing family physicians. Reading of research-based synopses was tracked in two contexts: (1) push, meaning to read on email and (2) pull, meaning to read after retrieval from one electronic knowledge resource. Dyads, defined as synopses first read as email alerts and subsequently retrieved in a search of a knowledge resource, were prospectively identified. Participants were interviewed about all of their dyads. Outcomes were the total number of dyads and their type.

Results: Over a period of 341 days, 194 unique synopses delivered to 41 participants resulted in 4937 synopsis readings. In all, 1205 synopses were retrieved over an average of 320 days. Of the 1205 retrieved synopses, 21 (1.7%) were dyads made by 17 family physicians. Of the 1205 retrieved synopses, 6 (0.5%) were known item type dyads. However, dyads also occurred serendipitously.

Conclusion: In the single knowledge resource we studied, email alerts containing research-based synopses were rarely retrieved. Our findings help us to better understand the effect of push on pull and to improve the integration of research-based information within electronic resources for clinicians.

Show MeSH
Questionnaire from Information Asessement Method (IAM) linked to one search in Essential Evidence Plus.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3278087&req=5

figure2: Questionnaire from Information Asessement Method (IAM) linked to one search in Essential Evidence Plus.

Mentions: On each PDA, IAM integrated with Essential Evidence Plus to track all opened information hits as well as the date and time of each search. Using a checklist of seven reasons, IAM prompted each participant to report the reason for their search [23]. IAM then asked the participant to rate the retrieved information in relation to three constructs: (1) situational relevance, (2) cognitive impact, and (3) use of the retrieved information for a specific patient. Figure 2 below shows screen shots from the IAM questionnaire and their corresponding constructs. Participants were trained to use Essential Evidence Plus, and their IAM ratings were transferred to our pull website when their PDA synced with their personal computer (PC). Participants entered the study from November 2007 through May 2008. Each participant had a unique start date defined by the date of their first rated search. Data collection ended in March 2009.


Do family physicians retrieve synopses of clinical research previously read as email alerts?

Grad R, Pluye P, Johnson-Lafleur J, Granikov V, Shulha M, Bartlett G, Marlow B - J. Med. Internet Res. (2011)

Questionnaire from Information Asessement Method (IAM) linked to one search in Essential Evidence Plus.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3278087&req=5

figure2: Questionnaire from Information Asessement Method (IAM) linked to one search in Essential Evidence Plus.
Mentions: On each PDA, IAM integrated with Essential Evidence Plus to track all opened information hits as well as the date and time of each search. Using a checklist of seven reasons, IAM prompted each participant to report the reason for their search [23]. IAM then asked the participant to rate the retrieved information in relation to three constructs: (1) situational relevance, (2) cognitive impact, and (3) use of the retrieved information for a specific patient. Figure 2 below shows screen shots from the IAM questionnaire and their corresponding constructs. Participants were trained to use Essential Evidence Plus, and their IAM ratings were transferred to our pull website when their PDA synced with their personal computer (PC). Participants entered the study from November 2007 through May 2008. Each participant had a unique start date defined by the date of their first rated search. Data collection ended in March 2009.

Bottom Line: Over a period of 341 days, 194 unique synopses delivered to 41 participants resulted in 4937 synopsis readings.However, dyads also occurred serendipitously.Our findings help us to better understand the effect of push on pull and to improve the integration of research-based information within electronic resources for clinicians.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Information Technology Primary Care Research Group, Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. roland.grad@mcgill.ca

ABSTRACT

Background: A synopsis of new clinical research highlights important aspects of one study in a brief structured format. When delivered as email alerts, synopses enable clinicians to become aware of new developments relevant for practice. Once read, a synopsis can become a known item of clinical information. In time-pressured situations, remembering a known item may facilitate information retrieval by the clinician. However, exactly how synopses first delivered as email alerts influence retrieval at some later time is not known.

Objectives: We examined searches for clinical information in which a synopsis previously read as an email alert was retrieved (defined as a dyad). Our study objectives were to (1) examine whether family physicians retrieved synopses they previously read as email alerts and then to (2) explore whether family physicians purposefully retrieved these synopses.

Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study in which a qualitative multiple case study explored the retrieval of email alerts within a prospective longitudinal cohort of practicing family physicians. Reading of research-based synopses was tracked in two contexts: (1) push, meaning to read on email and (2) pull, meaning to read after retrieval from one electronic knowledge resource. Dyads, defined as synopses first read as email alerts and subsequently retrieved in a search of a knowledge resource, were prospectively identified. Participants were interviewed about all of their dyads. Outcomes were the total number of dyads and their type.

Results: Over a period of 341 days, 194 unique synopses delivered to 41 participants resulted in 4937 synopsis readings. In all, 1205 synopses were retrieved over an average of 320 days. Of the 1205 retrieved synopses, 21 (1.7%) were dyads made by 17 family physicians. Of the 1205 retrieved synopses, 6 (0.5%) were known item type dyads. However, dyads also occurred serendipitously.

Conclusion: In the single knowledge resource we studied, email alerts containing research-based synopses were rarely retrieved. Our findings help us to better understand the effect of push on pull and to improve the integration of research-based information within electronic resources for clinicians.

Show MeSH