Information Use, Seeking Behaviors, and Barriers to Evidence-Based Information at a Large Teaching Hospital in the UK

Author:

Lagojda Lukasz1ORCID,O'Connell Bridget1,Brown Anna2ORCID,Dekker Natasha S. den

Affiliation:

1. University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire

2. University of Warwick

Abstract

Abstract Background: To better understand the needs of service users, this study explored the information use and the factors affecting access to evidence-based information by clinicians in a primary care setting. Methods: An online survey was distributed to all staff via SurveyMonkey®. Data were curated in Microsoft Excel and managed using SPSS v26. Graphs were generated using GraphPad PRIMS. Results: Ninety-three per cent of the surveyed clinicians used evidence-based information in practice, primarily for patient care and education. Clinicians employed a range of seeking behaviors to retrieve this information, which varied based on how often this information was needed. The barriers to evidence-based information varied between clinical professions but ‘time’ was the most consistent factor. The belief of evidence-based practice being not part of the job role was the overwhelming factor for not using evidence-based information. Conclusions: The findings of this study are consistent with previous reports describing significant impact of time and access to IT resources on whether search for evidence-based information and provided us with useful insights for improving our services.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference13 articles.

1. Levin A. The cochrane collaboration. Annals of internal medicine 2001 Aug 21,;135(4):309 – 12.

2. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: Reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR network;Simera I;BMC medicine 2010 Apr

3. A summary of the methods that the national clinical guideline centre uses to produce clinical guidelines for the national institute for health and clinical excellence;Hill J;Annals of internal medicine,2011

4. Too much guidance?;Allen D;The Lancet (British edition),2005

5. Clinical questions raised by clinicians at the point of care: A systematic review;Fiol G;JAMA internal medicine 2014 May

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3