ArticleBMJ open2025
Use of electronic point-of-care resources by early-career general practitioners and associations with their use during consultations: A cross-sectional analysis of consultation data.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the use, frequency and factors linked to the use of any electronic point of care resources (ePOC resources) used by early-career general practitioners (GPs in training, otherwise known as GP residents or registrars) during consultations; and the frequency, and factors linked to the use of evidence-based clinical summaries.
designCross-sectional analysis of data collected as part of the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) project from 2018 to 2022. Every 6 months, GP trainees record 60 consecutive consultations, including information about their use of resources.
settingAustralian training general practices.
participants3024 GP trainees in community-based vocational training. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the use of ePOC resources, and the secondary outcome was the use of evidence-based ePOC summaries.
resultsA total of 3024 GP trainees accessed electronic resources during patient encounters for 67 651/628 855 (10.8%) of diagnoses/problems. Use of ePOC resources increased 4% per year over the study period. Therapeutic Guidelines was accessed most often (27 435/79 536, 34.7% of all ePOC use) followed by Australian Medicines Handbook (7507, 9.4%) and HealthPathways (6965, 8.7%). Various factors were associated with increased use of ePOC resources, including increasing patient age, diagnosis/problem type, increasing years of experience prior to GP training and stage of training. GP trainees rarely accessed dedicated evidence-based clinical summaries.
conclusionsAustralian GP trainees use a range of resources to answer their clinical questions, mostly from
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.