ReviewJournal of general internal medicine2015
Factors Contributing to Variations in Physicians' Use of Evidence at The Point of Care: A Conceptual Model.
Review in Journal of general internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.
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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Educational considerations based on medical student use of polygenic risk information and apparent race in a simulated consultation.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Trial
- Prioritizing human-centered cancer care in a digital era.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Determining patient eligibility for a physical activity referral scheme through EHR data extraction.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Kidney Transplantation Contraindications: Variation in Nephrologist Practice and Training Vintage.Kidney international reports · 2024Article
- Associations between demographics and clinical ideology, beliefs, and practice patterns: a secondary analysis of a survey of randomly sampled United States chiropractors.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2023Article
- Article
- Practice Billing for Medicare Advance Care Planning Across the USA.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- A scoping review of medical practice variation research within the informatics literature.International journal of medical informatics · 2022Article
- Factors affecting primary care physician decision-making for patients with complex multimorbidity: a qualitative interview study.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Multilevel Influences on Providers' Delivery of Contraceptive Services: A Qualitative Thematic Analysis.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Intersection of Structural Racism, Social Determinants of Health, and Implicit Bias With Emergency Physician Admission Tendencies.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- The impact of Health Transformation Plan on natural vaginal delivery and cesarean section frequency in Iran: an interrupted time series analysis.BMC research notes · 2021Article
- Elicitation of Rheumatologist Preferences for the Treatment of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis After the Failure of a First Conventional Synthetic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Agent.Rheumatology and therapy · 2021Article
- Understanding Treatment Strategies and Preferences in Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer From the Japanese Physician Perspective.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Health system integration with physician specialties varies across markets and system types.Health services research · 2020Article
- How can we monitor the impact of national health information systems? Results from a scoping review.European journal of public health · 2020Article
- Variations in use of childbirth interventions in 13 high-income countries: A multinational cross-sectional study.PLoS medicine · 2020Article
- Unraveling the Complexity in the Design and Implementation of Bundled Payments: A Scoping Review of Key Elements From a Payer's Perspective.The Milbank quarterly · 2020Article
- Adherence to Current Lipid Guidelines by Physicians in Kuwait.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2020Article
- Incidence of thyroid cancer in Puerto Rico and the US by racial/ethnic group, 2011-2015.BMC cancer · 2019Article
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
There is ample evidence that many clinical decisions made by physicians are inconsistent with current and generally accepted evidence. This leads to the underuse of some efficacious diagnostic, preventive or therapeutic services, and the overuse of others of marginal or no value to the patient. Evolving new payment and delivery models place greater emphasis on the provision of evidence-based services at the point of care. However, changing physician clinical behaviors is likely to be difficult and slow. Policy makers therefore need to design interventions that are most effective in promoting greater evidence-based care. To help identify modifiable factors that can influence clinical decisions at the point of care, we present a conceptual model and literature review of physician decision making. We describe the multitude of factors--drawn from different disciplines--that have been shown to influence physician point-of-care decisions. We present a conceptual framework for organizing these factors, dividing them into patient, physician, practice site, physician organization, network, market, and public policy influences. In doing so, we review some of the literature that speak to these factors. We then identify areas where additional research is especially needed, and discuss the challenges and opportunities for health services and policy researchers to gain a better understanding of these factors, particularly those that are potentially modifiable by policymakers and organizational leaders.
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.