Dynamics of relevance judgment during physicians’ online information search process for patient treatment

Author:

Kim Soon,Chung EunKyung,Kwon Nahyun

Abstract

Physicians rely on online sources of information more so than ever, to find the information they need when treating patients, but little is known about determining the relevance criteria when searching for online sources. Relevance judgment criteria can change with a user’s background knowledge on a search topic. Physicians are a subset of users who have received insufficient attention in this relevance criteria research topic. Due to the dynamic and multidimensional nature of relevance judgments, it is important to understand how relevance judgment criteria change in the course of information search. This study aims to determine the dynamics in relevance judgment criteria in physicians’ information search process. We observed ten internal medicine physicians while they searched the online clinical information resource to resolve a clinical question concerning patient treatment. They rated on a checklist to assess relevance judgment criteria at each of the three stages in the search process, namely, problem recognition (before searching), system interaction (searching for online resources), and document interaction (selecting the final documents after searching). We conducted pre-interview and post-interview to probe physicians search behaviours and reasons for the assessments. Topical relevance, accuracy, and credibility were found to be the most important criteria for all three search stages; however, ratings of some relevance judgment criteria, such as title, obtainability, personal preference, and understandability, changed markedly across the search process. The criteria regarding the information content tended to be more important during the problem recognition stage, while the criteria in the information format became more important as the search progressed. Physicians preferred recently published review articles in highly reliable journals with well-written article outlines, which allowed them to have quick and clear understanding of the contents. By identifying specific relevance criteria prominent at each search stage, our study revealed that physicians employ a unique set of criteria when judging the relevance. Given the fact that physicians are relying on online resources to find answers to patient care, this study can help in developing the effective clinical information systems for physicians and integrating into the Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems.

Publisher

Univ. of Malaya

Subject

Library and Information Sciences

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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