Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37231391›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2023

Keeping up with evidence-based recommendations - a qualitative interview study with general practitioners in Germany on information-seeking behaviour in cardiovascular care.

Christine Arnold, Patrick Hennrich, Michel Wensing, Charlotte Ullrich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Christine ArnoldDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Patrick HennrichSection for Translational Health Economics, Department for Conservative Dentistry, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Michel WensingDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Charlotte UllrichDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. charlotte.ullrich@med.uni-heidelberg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the nature of their work, general practitioners (GPs) need to be up to date with evidence in various medical domains. While much synthesised research evidence is easily accessible nowadays, in practice, the time to search for and review this evidence proposes a challenge. In German primary care, the knowledge infrastructure is rather fragmented, leaving GPs with relatively few primary care specific resources of information and many resources from other medical fields. This study aimed to explore GPs information-seeking behaviour regarding evidence-based recommendations in cardiovascular care in Germany.

methodsTo explore views of GPs a qualitative research design was chosen. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews. In total, 27 telephone interviews with GPs were conducted between June and November 2021.Verbatim transcript interviews were then analysed using thematic analysis, deriving at themes inductively.

resultsTwo broad strategies of information-seeking behaviour in GP could be distinguished: (a) generic information-seeking behaviour and (b) casuistic information-seeking. The first referring to strategies GPs apply to keep up with medical developments such as new medication and the second referring to purposeful information exchange regarding individual patients, such as referral letters. The second strategy was also used to keep up with medical developments in general.

conclusionIn a fragmented information landscape, GPs used information exchange on individual patients to remain informed about medical developments in general. Initiatives to implement recommended practices need to take this into account, either by using these sources of influence or by making GPs aware of possible bias and risks. The findings also emphasize the importance of systematic evidence-based sources of information for GPs. TRAIL REGISTRATION: We registered the study prospectively on 07/11/2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, www.drks.de ) under ID no. DRKS00019219.

Indexed as

General PractitionersAttitude of Health PersonnelGermanyHumansInformation Seeking BehaviorQualitative ResearchAmbulatory cardiology careCardiovascular diseasesCoordination of careGermanyInformation behaviourInformation practiceInformation-seeking behaviourPrimary careQualitative interviews

Identifiers

PMID37231391
PMCPMC10214602

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.