ArticleClinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN2018
Young Kidney Professionals' Perspectives and Attitudes about Consuming Scientific Information: A Focus Group Study.
Article in Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The digital era has seen rapid changes in how information is consumed. Traditional dissemination of scholarly work through biomedical journals may not be optimally tailored to the preferences of younger clinicians and researchers. We aimed to describe the perspectives of young clinicians and researchers in kidney disease on consuming scientific information. Three focus groups were conducted during the 2017 American Society of Nephrology Kidney Week with a total of 29 nephrologists and researchers (ages 40 years old and younger) purposively sampled through our networks and the American Society of Nephrology registration database. Data were analyzed thematically. Of the 72 participants invited, 29 participated from 28 centers across 13 countries. Five themes were identified: capturing and retaining attention (with subthemes of triggering interest, optimizing readability, and navigation to sustain motivation); having discernible relevance (resonating with clinical and research interests, supporting professional development, action-oriented and readily applicable, able to disseminate, contextualizing the study, and filtering out informational noise); immediacy and efficiency in processing information (requiring instantaneous and easy access, enabling rapid understanding, and facilitating comprehension of complex concepts); trusting legitimate and credible sources (authoritative indicator of importance and quality, reputable experts broadening perspective, certainty and confidence with collegial input, accurate framing and translation of the message, ascertaining methodologic detail and nuances, and integrating the patient perspective); and social dialoguing and debate. Immediate and digitally optimized access motivated young kidney professionals to consume scientific information. Mechanisms that enable them to distil relevant and new evidence, appraise and apply information to clinical practice and research, disseminate studies to colleagues, and engage in discussion and debate may enhance their comprehension, confidence, interpretation, and use of scientific literature.
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.