ArticleAtencion primaria2010
[What do general practitioners think about evidenced-based medicine? A study with focus groups].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers to GPs' use of evidence-based medicine: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Pooled it
- Barriers Perceived by Managers and Clinical Professionals Related to the Implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breastfeeding through the Best Practice Spotlight Organization Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- [Statement by SemFYC on the access to scientific information by general practioners].Atencion primaria · 2011Article
- EBM in primary care: a qualitative multicenter study in Spain.BMC family practice · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the attitudes of a sample of General Practitioners (GPs) towards Evidenced-Based Medicine (EBM) and its use and the obstacles to put into practice in Primary Care (PC).
designQualitative study using Focus Groups (FG).
settingPrimary Care in the Autonomous Community of Murcia, Spain, January-June 2007.
participantsGPs with a clinical practice in PC in the Murcian Health Service.
methodTwo FG (with/without previous training in EBM). Using intentional sampling, 19 GPs were selected from PC professionals. The discussions were recorded on video and transcribed literally. The discussions were then, segmented, categorised and interpreted.
resultsAttitudes: EBM is useful, it helps to reduce variation in clinical practice and decreases uncertainty. Great importance is given to clinical experience and the role of the Pharmaceutical Industry and the Health Administration may have in its promotion is viewed with suspicion. Use: Its use is still limited. To consult with colleagues continues to be the main source of information. Obstacles: The major difficulties identified were the limited time it has been available, lack of experience and the language.
conclusionsAlthough GPs show a positive attitude towards EBM, there are still a few who recognise the use of consultation. The main limitation identified was lack of time in the clinic due to excessive pressure of care work. To increase its use, they proposed, more training activities, motivation by an appropriate process and reorganisation of their care work.
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.