...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of medical Internet research >Do Family Physicians Retrieve Synopses of Clinical Research Previously Read as Email Alerts?
【24h】

Do Family Physicians Retrieve Synopses of Clinical Research Previously Read as Email Alerts?

机译:家庭医生是否会检索以前作为电子邮件警报阅读的临床研究概要?

获取原文
           

摘要

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.
机译:背景:新的临床研究概要以简要的结构形式突出了一项研究的重要方面。概要作为电子邮件警报发送时,使临床医生可以了解与实践相关的新发展。阅读摘要后,就可以成为临床信息的已知项目。在时间紧迫的情况下,记住已知项目可能有助于临床医生检索信息。但是,尚不清楚最初作为电子邮件警报传递的概要如何影响以后的检索。目的:我们检查了对临床信息的搜索,在该临床信息中检索了以前被阅读为电子邮件警报的概要(定义为dyad)。我们的研究目标是(1)检查家庭医生是否检索了以前阅读为电子邮件警报的提要,然后(2)探索家庭医生是否有意检索了这些提要。方法:我们进行了一项混合方法研究,其中定性的多案例研究探索了在前瞻性纵向执业家庭医生队列中检索电子邮件警报的方法。在两种情况下跟踪了基于研究的摘要的阅读:(1)推送,意思是在电子邮件上阅读;(2)推送,意思是从一种电子知识资源检索后阅读。前瞻性地确定了Dyad,它们被定义为摘要,首先被读取为电子邮件警报,然后通过搜索知识资源进行检索。参加者接受了有关他们所有二分法的采访。结果是二联体的总数及其类型。结果:在341天的时间内,向41位参与者提供了194个独特的提要,产生了4937个提要的读数。在平均320天内,总共检索了1205个提要。在检索到的1205个大纲中,有21位(1.7%)是由17位家庭医生制作的二元组。在检索到的1205个概要中,有6个(0.5%)是已知的项目类型二元组。结论:在我们研究的单一知识资源中,很少检索到包含基于研究概要的电子邮件警报。我们的发现有助于我们更好地了解推拉的效果,并改善临床医生在电子资源中基于研究的信息的集成。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号