McMaster PLUS: A cluster randomized clinical trial of an intervention to accelerate clinical use of evidence-based information from digital libraries

被引:41
作者
Haynes, R. Brian [1 ]
Holland, Jennifer [1 ]
Cotoi, Chris [1 ]
McKinlay, R. James [1 ]
Wilczynski, Nancy L. [1 ]
Walters, Leslie A. [1 ]
Jedras, Dawn [1 ]
Parrish, Rick [1 ]
McKibbon, K. Ann [1 ]
Garg, Amit [1 ]
Walter, Stephen D. [1 ]
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, McMaster Hlth Sci Ctr, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
基金
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词
D O I
10.1197/jamia.M2158
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Background: Physicians have difficulty keeping up with new evidence from medical research. Methods: We developed the McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service (PLUS), an internet-based addition to an existing digital library, which delivered quality- and relevance-rated medical literature to physicians, matched to their clinical disciplines. We evaluated PLUS in a cluster-randomized trial of 203 participating physicians in Northern Ontario, comparing a Full-Serve version (that included alerts to new articles and a cumulative database of alerts) with a Self-Serve version (that included a passive guide to evidence-based literature). Utilization of the service was the primary trial end-point. Results: Mean logins to the library rose by 0.77 logins/month/user (95% CI 0.43, 1.11) in the Full-Serve group compared with the Self-Serve group. The proportion of Full-Serve participants who utilized the service during each month of the study period showed a sustained increase during the intervention period, with a relative increase of 57% (95% CI 12, 123) compared with the Self-Serve group. There were no differences in these proportions during the baseline period, and following the crossover of the Self-Serve group to Full-Serve, the Self-Serve group's usage became indistinguishable from that of the Full-Serve group (relative difference 4.4 (95% CI - 23.7, 43.0). Also during the intervention and crossover periods, measures of self-reported usefulness did not show a difference between the 2 groups. Conclusion: A quality- and relevance-rated online literature service increased the utilization of evidence-based information from a digital library by practicing physicians.
引用
收藏
页码:593 / 600
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] A COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF METAANALYSES OF RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF CLINICAL EXPERTS - TREATMENTS FOR MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION
    ANTMAN, EM
    LAU, J
    KUPELNICK, B
    MOSTELLER, F
    CHALMERS, TC
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1992, 268 (02): : 240 - 248
  • [2] Bennett Nancy L, 2004, J Contin Educ Health Prof, V24, P31, DOI 10.1002/chp.1340240106
  • [3] A taxonomy of generic clinical questions: classification study
    Ely, JW
    Osheroff, JA
    Gorman, PN
    Ebell, MH
    Chambliss, ML
    Pifer, EA
    Stavri, PZ
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 321 (7258) : 429 - 432
  • [4] Obstacles to answering doctors' questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study
    Ely, JW
    Osheroff, JA
    Ebell, MH
    Chambliss, ML
    Vinson, DC
    Stevermer, JJ
    Pifer, EA
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 324 (7339): : 710 - 713
  • [5] Fleiss J. L., 1981, Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, V2nd
  • [6] Variation in the use of online clinical evidence: a qualitative analysis
    Gosling, AS
    Westbrook, JI
    Coiera, EW
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2003, 69 (01) : 1 - 16
  • [7] Haynes R B, 2001, ACP J Club, V134, pA11
  • [8] Second-order peer review of the medical literature for clinical practitioners
    Haynes, RB
    Cotoi, C
    Holland, J
    Walters, L
    Wilczynski, N
    Jedraszewski, D
    McKinlay, J
    Parrish, R
    McKibbon, KA
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2006, 295 (15): : 1801 - 1808
  • [9] Holland Jennifer, 2005, AMIA Annu Symp Proc, P340
  • [10] Langton K B, 1996, Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp, P428