ArticleProceedings. AMIA Symposium1999
Medcast: evaluation of an intelligent pull technology to support the information needs of physicians.
Article in Proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enabling Access to Medical and Health Education in Rwanda Using Mobile Technology: Needs Assessment for the Development of Mobile Medical Educator Apps.JMIR medical education · 2016Article
- e-Health? Clinical information network interest and impediments in a community paediatric setting.Paediatrics & child health · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study reports the initial results of an evaluation of Medcast, a commercial medical information service that uses intelligent pull technology to deliver medical information to practicing physicians. Medical news, CME, and other information are transferred by modem nightly to the physician's computers where this information can be accessed at a convenient time. A survey was faxed to 195 subscribers to the system. A total of 73 (39%) responded. The results indicate that prior to implementation of the Medcast system, almost 40 percent of the respondents did not use their computers for professional activities because of time constraints, costs and computer literacy problems. After implementation of Medcast, almost 70 percent of the respondents used the system two or more hours per week. Ninety percent of the respondents felt that use of the system has enhanced their practice. These findings have important implications for future efforts to implement medical informatics applications to support the information needs of practicing physicians. Experience with intelligent pull technology that is relatively easy to use may be a good way to break down attitudes and barriers to the use of computer systems to support clinical practice and may prepare physicians for a wider use of the Internet to support their future information needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10566402PMC2232552What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.