ArticleCureus2022
Information Seeking Practices and Availability of Smart Devices Among Healthcare Professionals in a Lower-Middle-Income Country: An Analysis From Pakistan.
Article in Cureus, 2022. 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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is a principle that integrates clinical experience with relevant information available to provide adequate healthcare. It requires access to current medical literature. This paper analyzes the information requirements of a lower-middle-income country (LMIC) and the resources available and preferred by medical professionals. Methods A survey-based cross-sectional study was carried out among 160 participants, ranging in expertise from students to attending physicians in Karachi, Pakistan. The survey comprised questions to assess the clinical background, technology access, need for health-related information, and the preference for resources to obtain that information in different scenarios. They were also asked if they use PubMed and their recommended methods to improve information access. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS; IBM, NY, USA) software was used for all analyses. Results A basic mobile phone (with limited internet connectivity) was the most common device used at home (n=159; 99.4%) and work (n=141; 88.1%). No smart devices were available to 28 (17.5%) participants at work. Internet connectivity was available for 155 (96.9%) participants at home but only for 118 (73.7%) participants at work. About one-third (n=49; 30.6%) experienced questions arising in practice two to four times a day, and half of the participants (n=80; 50%) were very likely to look up a reference. The most common resource for the majority of given clinical scenarios was a senior colleague. At the same time, medical websites (Medscape, Up-to-Date, WebMD) were the first choice for a non-specific general medical query. About 68.75% (n=110) of participants claimed to use PubMed in daily practice. The most common reason for not using PubMed was the ease of using other search engines (like Google). Conclusions Improved access to the internet and well-reputed journals can enhance the practice of EBM in Pakistan. Limitations of technological access must be considered while designing information resources in lower-middle-income countries.
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.