Trial reportJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2008
The effect of training on question formulation among public health practitioners: results from a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of educational interventions for improving healthcare professionals' information literacy: A systematic review.Health information and libraries journal · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of librarian-provided services in healthcare settings: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAPooled it
- Rural providers' access to online resources: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2016Trial
- Health sciences librarians' instructional engagement in continuing education: a scoping review.The journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association · 2024Article
- Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2018Article
- Evidence-based information needs of public health workers: a systematized review.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2017Review
- Defining and Identifying Members of a Research Study Population: CTSA-Affiliated Faculty Members.Hypothesis : the newsletter of the Research Section of MLA · 2014Article
- Knowledge translation strategies to improve the use of evidence in public health decision making in local government: intervention design and implementation plan.Implementation science : IS · 2013Article
- Current practices in library/informatics instruction in academic libraries serving medical schools in the Western United States: a three-phase action research study.BMC medical education · 2013Article
- Response to Kelly Near and Ann Duesing's letter: "Informatics Training for Public Health Practitioners".Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2010Article
- Informatics training for public health practitioners.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo improve understanding of the information-seeking behaviors of public health professionals, the authors conducted this randomized controlled trial involving sixty participants to determine whether library and informatics training, with an emphasis on PubMed searching skills, increased the frequency and sophistication of participants' practice-related questions.
methodsThe intervention group (n = 34) received evidence-based public health library and informatics training first, whereas the control group (n = 26) received identical training two weeks later. The frequency and sophistication of the questions generated by both intervention and control groups during the interim two-week period served as the basis for comparison.
resultsThe intervention group reported an average of almost 1.8 times more questions than those reported by the control group (1.24 vs. 0.69 questions per participant); however, this difference did not reach statistical significance. The intervention group overall produced more sophisticated (foreground) questions than the control group (18 vs. 9); however, this difference also did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionThe training provided in the current study seemed to prompt public health practitioners to identify and articulate questions more often. Training appears to create the necessary precondition for increased information-seeking behavior among public health professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.