Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31914934›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

Applying evidence-based medicine in general practice: a video-stimulated interview study on workplace-based observation.

Lisanne S Welink, Kaatje Van Roy, Roger A M J Damoiseaux, Hilde A Suijker, Peter Pype, Esther de Groot, Marie-Louise E L Bartelink

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lisanne S WelinkJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. l.s.welink@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-0525-2333
Kaatje Van RoyDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, B-9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Roger A M J DamoiseauxJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Hilde A SuijkerJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter PypeDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, B-9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Esther de GrootJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marie-Louise E L BartelinkJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based medicine (EBM) in general practice involves applying a complex combination of best-available evidence, the patient's preferences and the general practitioner's (GP) clinical expertise in decision-making. GPs and GP trainees learn how to apply EBM informally by observing each other's consultations, as well as through more deliberative forms of workplace-based learning. This study aims to gain insight into workplace-based EBM learning by investigating the extent to which GP supervisors and trainees recognise each other's EBM behaviour through observation, and by identifying aspects that influence their recognition.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative multicentre study based on video-stimulated recall interviews (VSI) of paired GP supervisors and GP trainees affiliated with GP training institutes in Belgium and the Netherlands. The GP pairs (n = 22) were shown fragments of their own and their partner's consultations and were asked to elucidate their own EBM considerations and the ones they recognised in their partner's actions. The interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed with NVivo. By comparing pairs who recognised each other's considerations well with those who did not, we developed a model describing the aspects that influence the observer's recognition of an actor's EBM behaviour.

resultsOverall, there was moderate similarity between an actor's EBM behaviour and the observer's recognition of it. Aspects that negatively influence recognition are often observer-related. Observers tend to be judgemental, give unsolicited comments on how they would act themselves and are more concerned with the trainee-supervisor relationship than objective observation. There was less recognition when actors used implicit reasoning, such as mindlines (internalised, collectively reinforced tacit guidelines). Pair-related aspects also played a role: previous discussion of a specific topic or EBM decision-making generally enhanced recognition. Consultation-specific aspects played only a marginal role.

conclusionsGP trainees and supervisors do not fully recognise EBM behaviour through observing each other's consultations. To improve recognition of EBM behaviour and thus benefit from informal observational learning, observers need to be aware of automatic judgements that they make. Creating explicit learning moments in which EBM decision-making is discussed, can improve shared knowledge and can also be useful to unveil tacit knowledge derived from mindlines.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingEvidence-Based MedicineLearningObservationAdultAgedBelgiumFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPatient PreferenceQualitative ResearchVideo RecordingEvidence-based medicineFamily medicineGeneral practiceObservational learningVideo-stimulated elicitation interviewsWorkplace-based learning

Identifiers

PMID31914934
PMCPMC6950930

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.