How healthcare providers find information regarding benefits and harms of treatments at an independent academic center: a cross-sectional study (Preprint)

Abstract

The information-seeking behavior of physicians to cater to the patient's information needs is not comprehensively studied.

Our cross-sectional study's key goals were to understand providers' information-seeking behavior regarding answering patients' specific questions about treatments' benefits and harms.

Using an interview guide, we collected pertinent data from structured one-on-one interviews.

119 providers from eight departments participated. The majority, 62% (77/124), reported that patients brought information about treatment and 56% (69/124) about a diagnosis. 72%(89/124) reported using DynaMed, UptoDate, Lexicomp, and 54%(67/124) used Pubmed. 27%(33/124) referenced the clinical practice guidelines, 17% (21/124) referred to textbooks, and 15% (19/124) discussed with colleagues. 35%(44/124) reported conducting traditional critical appraisals to determine information's credibility.

We found that most physicians across all medical specialties used and preferred point-of-care tools such as DynaMed and UptoDate. However, many providers still rely on the reputation of the information source, such as a journal impact factor and the author's research credentials, to determine the credibility and reliability of the information. We believe healthcare providers need to take a more active role in guiding patients to credible, evidence-based sources of health information. Physicians need to use traditional critical appraisal tools to determine information credibility.