Translating Clinical Questions by Physicians Into Searchable Queries: Analytical Survey Study.
Web-based resources
clinical information science
evidence retrieval
evidence-based medicine
search engines
search taxonomy
Journal
JMIR medical education
ISSN: 2369-3762
Titre abrégé: JMIR Med Educ
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101684518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Apr 2020
20 Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
23
10
2019
accepted:
19
02
2020
revised:
27
01
2020
entrez:
21
4
2020
pubmed:
21
4
2020
medline:
21
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Staying up to date and answering clinical questions with current best evidence from health research is challenging. Evidence-based clinical texts, databases, and tools can help, but clinicians first need to translate their clinical questions into searchable queries. MacPLUS FS (McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search) is an online search engine that allows clinicians to explore multiple resources simultaneously and retrieves one single output that includes the following: (1) evidence from summaries (eg, UpToDate and DynaMed), (2) preappraised research (eg, EvidenceAlerts), and (3) non-preappraised research (eg, PubMed), with and without validated bibliographic search filters. MacPLUS FS can also be used as a laboratory to explore clinical questions and evidence retrieval. Our primary objective was to examine how clinicians formulate their queries on a federated search engine, according to the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework. Our secondary objective was to assess which resources were accessed by clinicians to answer their questions. We performed an analytical survey among 908 clinicians who used MacPLUS FS in the context of a randomized controlled trial on search retrieval. Recording account log-ins and usage, we extracted all 1085 queries performed during a 6-month period and classified each search term according to the PICO framework. We further categorized queries into background (eg, "What is porphyria?") and foreground questions (eg, "Does treatment A work better than B?"). We then analyzed the type of resources that clinicians accessed. There were 695 structured queries, after exclusion of meaningless queries and iterations of similar searches. We classified 56.5% (393/695) of these queries as background questions and 43.5% (302/695) as foreground questions, the majority of which were related to questions about therapy (213/695, 30.6%), followed by diagnosis (48/695, 6.9%), etiology (24/695, 3.5%), and prognosis (17/695, 2.5%). This distribution did not significantly differ between postgraduate residents and medical faculty physicians (P=.51). Queries included a median of 3 search terms (IQR 2-4), most often related to the population and intervention or test, rarely related to the outcome, and never related to the comparator. About half of the resources accessed (314/610, 51.5%) were summaries, 24.4% (149/610) were preappraised research, and 24.1% were (147/610) non-preappraised research. Our results, from a large sample of real-life queries, could guide the development of educational interventions to improve clinicians' retrieval skills, as well as inform the design of more useful evidence-based resources for clinical practice. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02038439; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02038439.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Staying up to date and answering clinical questions with current best evidence from health research is challenging. Evidence-based clinical texts, databases, and tools can help, but clinicians first need to translate their clinical questions into searchable queries. MacPLUS FS (McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search) is an online search engine that allows clinicians to explore multiple resources simultaneously and retrieves one single output that includes the following: (1) evidence from summaries (eg, UpToDate and DynaMed), (2) preappraised research (eg, EvidenceAlerts), and (3) non-preappraised research (eg, PubMed), with and without validated bibliographic search filters. MacPLUS FS can also be used as a laboratory to explore clinical questions and evidence retrieval.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Our primary objective was to examine how clinicians formulate their queries on a federated search engine, according to the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework. Our secondary objective was to assess which resources were accessed by clinicians to answer their questions.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed an analytical survey among 908 clinicians who used MacPLUS FS in the context of a randomized controlled trial on search retrieval. Recording account log-ins and usage, we extracted all 1085 queries performed during a 6-month period and classified each search term according to the PICO framework. We further categorized queries into background (eg, "What is porphyria?") and foreground questions (eg, "Does treatment A work better than B?"). We then analyzed the type of resources that clinicians accessed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were 695 structured queries, after exclusion of meaningless queries and iterations of similar searches. We classified 56.5% (393/695) of these queries as background questions and 43.5% (302/695) as foreground questions, the majority of which were related to questions about therapy (213/695, 30.6%), followed by diagnosis (48/695, 6.9%), etiology (24/695, 3.5%), and prognosis (17/695, 2.5%). This distribution did not significantly differ between postgraduate residents and medical faculty physicians (P=.51). Queries included a median of 3 search terms (IQR 2-4), most often related to the population and intervention or test, rarely related to the outcome, and never related to the comparator. About half of the resources accessed (314/610, 51.5%) were summaries, 24.4% (149/610) were preappraised research, and 24.1% were (147/610) non-preappraised research.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results, from a large sample of real-life queries, could guide the development of educational interventions to improve clinicians' retrieval skills, as well as inform the design of more useful evidence-based resources for clinical practice.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02038439; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02038439.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32310137
pii: v6i1e16777
doi: 10.2196/16777
pmc: PMC7199131
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02038439']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e16777Informations de copyright
©Aurélie Seguin, Robert Brian Haynes, Sebastian Carballo, Alfonso Iorio, Arnaud Perrier, Thomas Agoritsas. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (http://mededu.jmir.org), 20.04.2020.
Références
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Aug 15;15(8):e164
pubmed: 23948488
BMJ. 2002 Mar 23;324(7339):710
pubmed: 11909789
Am J Med. 2000 Aug 15;109(3):218-23
pubmed: 10974185
Ann Fam Med. 2007 Jul-Aug;5(4):345-52
pubmed: 17664501
Int J Qual Health Care. 2006 Jun;18(3):165-6
pubmed: 16613986
ACP J Club. 2000 Jan-Feb;132(1):A11-4
pubmed: 10689385
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 May;174(5):710-8
pubmed: 24663331
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Jun 20;132(12):996-8
pubmed: 10858185
Postgrad Med J. 2010 Aug;86(1018):459-65
pubmed: 20709767
Implement Sci. 2014 Sep 20;9:125
pubmed: 25239537
Ann Fam Med. 2013 Nov-Dec;11(6):559-67
pubmed: 24218380
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 14;(3):CD004749
pubmed: 25770311
JAMA. 2008 Oct 15;300(15):1814-6
pubmed: 18854545
Postgrad Med J. 2015 Feb;91(1072):83-91
pubmed: 25655251
BMJ. 1997 Mar 29;314(7085):947-9
pubmed: 9099121
BMJ. 2005 Jan 8;330(7482):68
pubmed: 15619601
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Jun 26;15(6):e122
pubmed: 23803299
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007 Jun 15;7:16
pubmed: 17573961
Fam Med. 2003 Apr;35(4):257-60
pubmed: 12729309
Can J Neurol Sci. 2013 Jul;40(4):448-9
pubmed: 23786723
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Jun 12;14(3):e85
pubmed: 22693047
PLoS Med. 2010 Sep 21;7(9):e1000326
pubmed: 20877712
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Jun 30;7:28
pubmed: 17603909
Can Fam Physician. 2012 Jun;58(6):e344-51
pubmed: 22700742
BMJ. 1999 Aug 7;319(7206):358-61
pubmed: 10435959
BMJ. 2008 Sep 24;337:a1253
pubmed: 18815165
Aust Fam Physician. 2007 Dec;36(12):1065-9
pubmed: 18075638
J Med Libr Assoc. 2012 Apr;100(2):121-6
pubmed: 22514508
Am J Emerg Med. 2008 Feb;26(2):144-7
pubmed: 18272092