REVIEWKnowledge management in clinical practice: a systematic review of information seeking behavior in physicians
Introduction
The advent of clinical governance demands the incorporation of research-based evidence into clinical practice [1]. Implicit in this demand is the need for access to both medical information and knowledge. Knowledge-need and information-retrieval are distinct entities of the spectrum of information flow through which knowledge transfer occurs [2].
A dilemma has arisen from the explosion in volume of published medical research. Physicians have to effectively deal with the resultant snowstorm of information in order to make informed evidence-based decisions [3]. The encouragement of physicians to adopt the principles and practice of evidence-based medicine should not take place in isolation from the problems associated with knowledge transfer and information retrieval.
Advances in information technology have brought into existence electronic information resources such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of databases. It was expected that these electronic resources would help tackle the problems of information overflow in clinical practice [4]. However, concerns still exist regarding the gaps in knowledge base of the physician, with lack of timely access to information [5].
Regardless of the etiology, such gaps in knowledge impede the proper practice of evidence-based medicine. The doctrine of evidence-based medicine raises fundamental questions regarding how often physicians generate questions in clinical practice, what the categories of frequently asked questions are [6], what resources are available to them and what resources they frequently patronize in seeking answers to clinical questions.
In the past two decades, a number of studies have addressed directly or indirectly, the information needs of physicians. One review in particular in 1996 described the state of clinical information need [7]. This systematic review updates that review and evaluates the information-seeking habits of physicians determining the nature of their information resource preferences.
Section snippets
Selection criteria
We selected trials or reviews that identified information seeking behavior, frequently asked questions, information needs, clinical questions, information sources, or knowledge resources. Trials had physicians as their primary or sole subjects. Studies had to explicitly or implicitly define information need as medical information need rather than the need for non-medical information or patient data. We excluded studies that did not report quantitative observational or survey data in the form of
Results
The initial search returned over 7000 papers. The second search returned 1947 papers. Nineteen studies met the eligibility criteria (Table 1). The methods used to collect information seeking behavior were questionnaire in nine (47%) studies and interview in eight (42%). Some studies employed a combination of both methods of data collection. The remainder were record reviews or observational in nature. The majority of studies involved primary care physicians; one study involved surgeons and one
Discussion
The weakness of this systematic review lies partly in the drawbacks of the individual studies and partly in the inherent differences of the studies.
Data collection methodology can be fraught with weaknesses that distort study results; for example, there is the concern of potential bias when mail survey method is adopted. Covell et al. [14] compared questionnaire responses with observations made during office-based interviews. The results of this study demonstrated that the study participants
Acknowledgements
Professor Paul Glasziou, Professor in Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Mayne Medical School, The University of Queensland, Qld., Australia. Dr Scott Richardson, Associate Professor of Medicine, Chief, Division of General Internal Medicine, Wright State University School of Medicine, Dayton, OH, USA.
References (20)
- et al.
Residents’ medical information needs in clinic: are they being met
Am. J. Med.
(2000) - et al.
Expanding the concept of medical information: an observational study of physicians’ information needs
Comput. Biomed. Res.
(1992) - et al.
Implementing clinical governance: turning vision into reality
Br. Med. J.
(2001) Management of explicit and tacit knowledge
J. R. Soc. Med.
(2001)- et al.
Information overload: opportunities and challenges for the GP's desktop
Medinfo
(1998) - et al.
How well do physicians use electronic information retrieval systems? A framework for investigation and systematic review
J. Am. Med. Assoc.
(1998) - et al.
Health science information management and continuing education of physicians. A survey of US primary care practitioners and their opinion leaders
Ann. Intern. Med.
(1989) - et al.
A taxonomy of generic clinical questions: classification study
Br. Med. J.
(2000) What clinical information do doctors need
Br. Med. J.
(1996)The information needs of practicing physicians in northeastern New York State
Bull. Med. Libr. Assoc.
(1978)
Cited by (236)
Removing barriers to plant-based diets: Assisting doctors with vegan patients
2024, Journal of Behavioral and Experimental EconomicsLeveraging semantic context to establish access controls for secure cloud-based electronic health records
2024, International Journal of Information Management Data InsightsLiterature search: Simple rules for confronting the unknown
2022, Medical Journal Armed Forces IndiaCitation Excerpt :Firstly, most researchers have insufficient knowledge on conducting a literature review; second, many cite time constraints to find the best available evidence. Third, the best available evidence may be weak.3–7 This review attempts to resolve the first issue by describing a systematic stepwise approach to a web-based literature search, from framing a comprehensive search question to searching a database.
Clinical information seeking behavior of physicians: A systematic review
2020, International Journal of Medical InformaticsA BERT-based sequential deep neural architecture to identify contribution statements and extract phrases for triplets from scientific publications
2024, International Journal on Digital Libraries