Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32310137›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2020

Translating Clinical Questions by Physicians Into Searchable Queries: Analytical Survey Study.

Aurélie Seguin, Robert Brian Haynes, Sebastian Carballo, Alfonso Iorio, Arnaud Perrier, Thomas Agoritsas

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02038439 (Multifaceted Online Interventions to Increase the Quantity and Quality of Searching for Current Best Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT02038439 nacompletednot on this map

Multifaceted Online Interventions to Increase the Quantity and Quality of Searching for Current Best Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcMaster UniversityRan2014 to 2014Enrolled908ConditionsPhysicians Evidence Retrieval SkillsArmsIntervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach, Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

6 authors.

Aurélie SeguinDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9519-3399
Robert Brian HaynesDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1453-3196
Sebastian CarballoDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8344-4293
Alfonso IorioDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3331-8766
Arnaud PerrierDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5549-8609
Thomas AgoritsasDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6182-9969

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStaying up to date and answering clinical questions with current best evidence from health research is challenging. Evidence-based clinical texts, databases, and tools can help, but clinicians first need to translate their clinical questions into searchable queries. MacPLUS FS (McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search) is an online search engine that allows clinicians to explore multiple resources simultaneously and retrieves one single output that includes the following: (1) evidence from summaries (eg, UpToDate and DynaMed), (2) preappraised research (eg, EvidenceAlerts), and (3) non-preappraised research (eg, PubMed), with and without validated bibliographic search filters. MacPLUS FS can also be used as a laboratory to explore clinical questions and evidence retrieval.

objectiveOur primary objective was to examine how clinicians formulate their queries on a federated search engine, according to the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework. Our secondary objective was to assess which resources were accessed by clinicians to answer their questions.

methodsWe performed an analytical survey among 908 clinicians who used MacPLUS FS in the context of a randomized controlled trial on search retrieval. Recording account log-ins and usage, we extracted all 1085 queries performed during a 6-month period and classified each search term according to the PICO framework. We further categorized queries into background (eg, "What is porphyria?") and foreground questions (eg, "Does treatment A work better than B?"). We then analyzed the type of resources that clinicians accessed.

resultsThere were 695 structured queries, after exclusion of meaningless queries and iterations of similar searches. We classified 56.5% (393/695) of these queries as background questions and 43.5% (302/695) as foreground questions, the majority of which were related to questions about therapy (213/695, 30.6%), followed by diagnosis (48/695, 6.9%), etiology (24/695, 3.5%), and prognosis (17/695, 2.5%). This distribution did not significantly differ between postgraduate residents and medical faculty physicians (P=.51). Queries included a median of 3 search terms (IQR 2-4), most often related to the population and intervention or test, rarely related to the outcome, and never related to the comparator. About half of the resources accessed (314/610, 51.5%) were summaries, 24.4% (149/610) were preappraised research, and 24.1% were (147/610) non-preappraised research.

conclusionsOur results, from a large sample of real-life queries, could guide the development of educational interventions to improve clinicians' retrieval skills, as well as inform the design of more useful evidence-based resources for clinical practice.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02038439; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02038439.

Indexed as

clinical information scienceevidence-based medicineevidence retrievalsearch enginessearch taxonomyWeb-based resources

Identifiers

PMID32310137
PMCPMC7199131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.