SynthesisThe Journal of continuing education in the health professions2017
Prescribers' Knowledge and Skills for Interpreting Research Results: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The Journal of continuing education in the health professions, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physician Interpretation of Data of Uncertain Clinical Utility in Oncology Prescription Drug Promotion.The oncologist · 2021Trial
- Healthcare providers' understanding of data displays of clinical trial information: a scoping review of the literature.Journal of communication in healthcare · 2023Article
- Complexity of Data Displays in Prescription Drug Advertisements for Healthcare Providers.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2023Article
- Experts' Views on FDA Regulatory Standards for Drug and High-Risk Medical Devices: Implications for Patient Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Expectations for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Psychiatry.Current psychiatry reports · 2022Review
- Influence of data disclosures on physician decisions about off-label uses: findings from a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- A Guide to Basic Statistics for Educational Research.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2021Article
- A follow-up study on the effects of an educational intervention against pharmaceutical promotion.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Physicians' Understanding of Clinical Trial Data in Professional Prescription Drug Promotion.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAppropriate medication prescribing may be influenced by a prescriber's ability to understand and interpret medical research. The objective of this review was to synthesize the research related to prescribers' critical appraisal knowledge and skills-defined as the understanding of statistical methods, biases in studies, and relevance and validity of evidence.
methodsWe searched PubMed and other databases from January 1990 through September 2015. Two reviewers independently screened and selected studies of any design conducted in the United States, the United Kingdom, or Canada that involved prescribers and that objectively measured critical appraisal knowledge, skills, understanding, attitudes, or prescribing behaviors. Data were narratively synthesized.
resultsWe screened 1204 abstracts, 72 full-text articles, and included 29 studies. Study populations included physicians. Physicians' extant knowledge and skills were in the low to middle of the possible score ranges and demonstrated modest increases in response to interventions. Physicians with formal education in epidemiology, biostatistics, and research demonstrated higher levels of knowledge and skills. In hypothetical scenarios presenting equivalent effect sizes, the use of relative effect measures was associated with greater perceptions of medication effectiveness and intent to prescribe, compared with the use of absolute effect measures. The evidence was limited by convenience samples and study designs that limit internal validity. DISCUSSION: Critical appraisal knowledge and skills are limited among physicians. The effect measure used can influence perceptions of treatment effectiveness and intent to prescribe. How critical appraisal knowledge and skills fit among the myriad of influences on prescribing behavior is not known.
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.