Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17238418›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2006

Cognitive impact assessment of electronic knowledge resources: a mixed methods evaluation study of a handheld prototype.

Pierre Pluye, Roland M Grad

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pierre PluyeDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, 517 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H2W 1S4.
Roland M Grad
McGill University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleWe recently proposed a new method to systematically assess the cognitive impact of knowledge resources on health professionals.

objectiveTo describe promises and shortcomings of a handheld computer prototype of this method.

backgroundWe developed an impact scale, and combined this scale with a Computerized Ecological Momentary Assessment technique.

methodWe conducted a mixed methods evaluation study using a 7-item scale within a questionnaire linked to a commercial knowledge resource. Over two months of Family Medicine training, 17 residents assessed the impact of 1,981 information hits retrieved on handheld computer. From observations, log-reports, archives of hits and interviews, we examined issues associated with hardware, software and the questionnaire.

findingsFifteen residents found the questionnaire clearly written, and only one pointed to the questionnaire as a major reason for their low level of use of the resource. Residents reported technical problems (e.g. screen trouble) or limitations (e.g. limited tracking function) and socio-technical issues (e.g. software dependency).

conclusionLessons from this study suggest improvements to guide future implementation of our method for assessing the cognitive impact of knowledge resources on health professionals.

Indexed as

Computers, HandheldDatabases as TopicInformation Storage and RetrievalAttitude to ComputersCognitionConsumer BehaviorEquipment FailureFamily PracticeHumansInternship and ResidencyLongitudinal StudiesSoftwareSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID17238418
PMCPMC1839687
OpenAlexW102980481

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.