ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2021
Clinical informationist participation in grand round sessions of gastroenterology department: An action research study.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence as a transformative tool for empowering the role of clinical informationists in healthcare systems.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNowadays, providing access to the required information by clinical informationist (CI) is vital for clinical teams to make the best decision. This study was carried out to identifying how CIs should participate in grand round (GR). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe current study is an action research study. It was conducted in the GR sessions of the Gastroenterology department of Al-Zahra Hospital affiliated with Isfahan University of Medical Sciences in 2017. Participants included attending physicians, fellowship students of the Gastroenterology departments, a CI, and two supervising medical librarians. Data were collected through observation and discussion. Qualitative content analysis and concept mapping were used for data analysis.
resultsThe findings indicated that existing problems were related to the CI, medical team, and infrastructural ones. The participation of the CI in medical team was arranged based on the following steps: planning, action, evaluation, and suggestions. It started from an initial diagnosis of patients and ended in GR meetings. During evaluation step, suggestions were made to remove the existing problems and in the fifth step, results were summarized and a framework for the participation of the CI in GR sessions was suggested.
conclusionsMedical team members were satisfied with the participation of the CI, but it is necessary to remove the existing structural and personal barriers (related to the CI and medical team members), in order to improve the efficiency of this participation.
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.