Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40852513›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2025

Physicians' information-seeking, appraising, and clinical decision-making practices for drug prescriptions: an exploratory study.

Akhi Nath, Julien Meyer, Mathieu Templier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Akhi Nathakhi.nath@torontomu.ca, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada.
Julien Meyerjulien.meyer@torontomu.ca, Associate Professor at the School of Health Services Management, Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada.
Mathieu Templiermathieu.templier@fsa.ulaval.ca, Professor of Management Information Systems in the Faculty of Business Administration at Université Laval, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to understand the process of physicians' evidence-based clinical decision-making for new drug prescriptions. Methods: Eleven semi-structured interviews were conducted, and thematic coding was used for data analysis. Results: Several findings emerged. First, point-of-care information seeking focuses more on accessible and easy-to-use sources, such as medical websites, while out-of-practice searches encompass broader sources such as printed sources and extended networks. Medical websites are becoming preferred sources of information. Second, critical appraisal of information is performed passively by using pre-appraised information sources and referring to professional networks. Third, professional networks (i.e., specialists and senior colleagues) remain essential throughout the process and are pivotal for the decision to change prescription practices. Conclusions: Medical information systems that facilitate immediate access to summarized reliable evidence and feature real-time connectivity to the communities of practice can be an effective strategy for improving physicians' evidence-based practice for new drug prescriptions.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingDrug PrescriptionsInformation Seeking BehaviorPhysiciansPractice Patterns, Physicians'FemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchClinical decision-makingEvidence Based PracticeInformation-Seeking

Identifiers

PMID40852513
PMCPMC12369961

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.