ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2011
Type of evidence behind point-of-care clinical information products: a bibliometric analysis.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of Clinicians' Use of Electronic Knowledge Resources on Clinical and Learning Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Comparing the Use of DynaMed and UpToDate by Physician Trainees in Clinical Decision-Making: A Randomized Crossover Trial.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Trial
- Development and Assessment of a Point-of-Care Application (Genomic Medicine Guidance) for Heritable Thoracic Aortic Disease.JMIRx med · 2024Article
- Straight to the point: evaluation of a Point of Care Information (POCI) resource in answering disease-related questions.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- Genomic Medicine Guidance: A Point-of-Care App for Heritable Thoracic Aortic Diseases.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023Article
- Adapting a large database of point of care summarized guidelines: a process description.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2017Article
- Article
- Breadth of Coverage, Ease of Use, and Quality of Mobile Point-of-Care Tool Information Summaries: An Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2016Article
- Providing Doctors With High-Quality Information: An Updated Evaluation of Web-Based Point-of-Care Information Summaries.Journal of medical Internet research · 2016Review
- Point of care information services: a platform for self-directed continuing medical education for front line decision makers.Postgraduate medical journal · 2015Review
- In an Age of Open Access to Research Policies: Physician and Public Health NGO Staff Research Use and Policy Awareness.PloS one · 2015Article
- Article
- Characterizing physicians' information needs at the point of care.Perspectives on medical education · 2014Article
- Access of primary and secondary literature by health personnel in an academic health center: implications for open access.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2013Article
- Features of effective medical knowledge resources to support point of care learning: a focus group study.PloS one · 2013Article
- The evaluation of an evidence-based clinical answer format for pediatricians.BMC pediatrics · 2012Article
- Public access and use of health research: an exploratory study of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy using interviews and surveys of health personnel.Journal of medical Internet research · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care (POC) products are widely used as information reference tools in the clinical setting. Although usability, scope of coverage, ability to answer clinical questions, and impact on health outcomes have been studied, no comparative analysis of the characteristics of the references, the evidence for the content, in POC products is available.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to compare the type of evidence behind five POC clinical information products.
methodsThis study is a comparative bibliometric analysis of references cited in monographs in POC products. Five commonly used products served as subjects for the study: ACP PIER, Clinical Evidence, DynaMed, FirstCONSULT, and UpToDate. The four clinical topics examined to identify content in the products were asthma, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and carbon monoxide poisoning. Four indicators were measured: distribution of citations, type of evidence, product currency, and citation overlap. The type of evidence was determined based primarily on the publication type found in the MEDLINE bibliographic record, as well as the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), both assigned by the US National Library of Medicine. MeSH is the controlled vocabulary used for indexing articles in MEDLINE/PubMed.
resultsFirstCONSULT had the greatest proportion of references with higher levels of evidence publication types such as systematic review and randomized controlled trial (137/153, 89.5%), although it contained the lowest total number of references (153/2330, 6.6%). DynaMed had the largest total number of references (1131/2330, 48.5%) and the largest proportion of current (2007-2009) references (170/1131, 15%). The distribution of references cited for each topic varied between products. For example, asthma had the most references listed in DynaMed, Clinical Evidence, and FirstCONSULT, while hypertension had the most references in UpToDate and ACP PIER. An unexpected finding was that the rate of citation overlap was less than 1% for each topic across all five products.
conclusionsDifferences between POC products are revealed by examining the references cited in the monographs themselves. Citation analysis extended to include key content indicators can be used to compare the evidence levels of the literature supporting the content found in POC products.
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.