ArticlePloS one2012
Online medical literature consultation habits of academic teaching physicians in the EU and CIS countries: a cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and in the European Union (EU2004), ample availability of up to date medical scientific literature is important for progress in medical science and for the education of the next generation of healthcare workers. The aim of this research is to assess if the use of online medical literature among academic teaching (AT) physicians is at the same level in the CIS as in the EU2004. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsIn the capital cities of the CIS and the EU2004 member states, AT physicians holding an academic position at least equivalent to an associate professor and performing the three classical tasks in academic medicine (teaching, research and patient care) were interviewed about their use of and familiarity with the Internet and 9 online literature services, including journals and bibliographical databases such as PubMed (Medline), The Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Library staff members were interviewed about the availability of these online literature services at their libraries. About 750 physicians and 40 library staff members were invited for participation. Eventually 124 AT physicians and 22 library staff members participated. Internet was everywhere available, but used daily by more AT physicians in the EU2004 (71% versus 48% in the CIS, P = .005). AT physicians in the EU2004 accessed a higher percentage of all articles online (74% versus 43% in the CIS, P<.001). PubMed (P<.001), The Cochrane Library (P<.001) and Web of Science (P<.003) were used more frequently in the EU2004. In the EU2004 more AT physicians were familiar with Open Access journals (89% versus 51% in the CIS, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: AT physicians in the CIS use online medical literature less than in the EU2004. It is recommended that the awareness of freely available online literature services such as Open Access journals is enhanced among AT physicians and library staff members, especially in the CIS.
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.