Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15109337›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2004

The impact of evidence on physicians' inpatient treatment decisions.

Brian P Lucas, Arthur T Evans, Brendan M Reilly, Yuri V Khodakov, Kalyani Perumal, Louis G Rohr, Joseph A Akamah, Tunji M Alausa, Christopher A Smith, Jeremy P Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. How to understand and conduct evidence-based medicine.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2016
    Review
  10. The effect of scientific evidence on conservation practitioners' management decisions.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2015
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. President's column: interoperability--the 30% solution: from dialog and rhetoric to reality.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Current Status and Future Prospects of Clinical Psychology: Toward a Scientifically Principled Approach to Mental and Behavioral Health Care.Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society · 2008
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Are there differences in online resources for answering primary care questions?AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2005
    Article
  19. The essence of EBM.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Brian P LucasDepartment of Medicine, John H Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County and Rush Medical College, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. brian_lucas@tush.edu
Arthur T Evans
Brendan M Reilly
Yuri V Khodakov
Kalyani Perumal
Louis G Rohr
Joseph A Akamah
Tunji M Alausa
Christopher A Smith
Jeremy P Smith

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePrevious studies have shown that most medical inpatients receive treatment supported by strong evidence (evidence-based treatment), but they have not assessed whether and how physicians actually use evidence when making their treatment decisions. We investigated whether physicians would change inpatient treatment if presented with the results of a literature search.

designBefore-after study.

settingLarge public teaching hospital.

participantsRandom sample of 146 inpatients cared for by 33 internal medicine attending physicians.

interventionsAfter physicians committed to a specific diagnosis and treatment plan, investigators performed standardized literature searches and provided the search results to the attending physicians. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsThe primary study outcome was the number of patients whose attending physicians would change treatment due to the literature searches. These changes were evaluated by blinded peer review. A secondary outcome was the proportion of patients who received evidence-based treatment before and after the literature searches. Attending physicians changed treatment for 23 (18%) of 130 eligible patients (95% confidence interval, 12% to 24%) as a result of the literature searches. Overall, 86% of patients (112 of 130) received evidence-based treatments before the searches and 87% (113 of 130) after the searches. Changes were not related to whether patients were receiving evidence-based treatment before the search (P =.6). Panels of peer reviewers judged the quality of patient care as improved or maintained for 18 (78%) of the 23 patients with treatment changes.

conclusionsSearching the literature could improve the treatment of many medical inpatients, including those already receiving evidence-based treatment.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesEvidence-Based MedicineHospitalizationOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareAdultAgedChicagoGuideline AdherenceHospital Bed Capacity, 500 and overHospitals, CountyHospitals, TeachingHumansInternal MedicineMedical Staff, HospitalMiddle AgedProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID15109337
PMCPMC1492243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.