How well do physicians use electronic information retrieval systems?: A framework for investigation and systematic review

JAMA

Volumn 280, Issue 15, 1998, Pages 1347-1352

  Hersh, William R ^a,b   Hickam, David H ^a,c  

^a OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c PORTLAND VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPUTER SYSTEM; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW;

EID: 0032556171     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.280.15.1347     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Lindberg D, Siegel E, Rapp B, Wallingford K, Wilson S. Use of MEDLINE by physicians for clinical problem solving. JAMA. 1993;269:3124-3129.
2. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992;268:2420-2425.
3. Sackett D, Richardson W, Rosenberg W, Haynes R. Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone; 1997.
4. Fletcher R, Fletcher S. What is the future of internal medicine? Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:1144-1145.
5. Lancaster F, Warner A. Information Retrieval Today. Arlington, Va: Information Resources Press; 1993.
6. Fidel R, Soergel D. Factors affecting online bibliographic retrieval: a conceptual framework for research. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1983;34:163-180.
7. Horowitz GL, Jackson JD, Bleich HL. Paper-Chase: self-service bibliographic retrieval. JAMA. 1983;250:2494-2499.
8. Collen M, Flagle C. Full-text medical literature retrieval by computer: a pilot test. JAMA 1985;254: 2768-2774.
9. Markert R, Parisi A, Barnes H, et al. Medical student, resident, and faculty use of a computerized literature searching system. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1989;77:133-137.
10. Haynes R, McKibbon K, Walker C, Ryan N, Fitzgerald D, Ramsden M. Online access to MEDLINE in clinical settings. Ann Intern Med. 1990;112:78-84.
11. Abate M, Shumway J, Jacknowitz A. Use of two online services as drug information sources for health professionals. Methods Inf Med. 1992;31: 153-158.
12. Hersh W, Hickam D. The use of a multi-application computer workstation in a clinical setting. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1994;82:382-389.
13. Marshall J. The continuation of end-user on line searching by health professionals: preliminary survey results. In: Proceedings of the Medical Library Association Annual Meeting; May 18-24, 1990; Detroit, Mich.
14. Haynes R, Ramsden M, McKibbon K, Walker C. Online access to MEDLINE in clinical settings: impact of user fees. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1991;79: 377-381.
15. Wildemuth B, deBliek R, Friedman C, File D. Medical students' personal knowledge, searching proficiency, and database use in problem solving. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1995;46:590-607.
16. Hersh W, Pentecost J, Hickam D. A task-oriented approach to information retrieval evaluation. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1996;47:50-56.
17. Haynes R, McKibbon K, Walker C, et al. Computer searching of the medical literature: an evaluation of MEDLINE searching systems. Ann Intern Med. 1985;103:812-816.
18. Haynes R, Walker C, McKibbon K, Johnston M, William A. Performance of 27 MEDLINE systems tested by searches with clinical questions. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:285-295.
19. Haynes RB, Johnston ME, McKibbon KA, Walker CJ, William AR. A program to enhance clinical use of MEDLINE: a randomized controlled trial. Online J Curr Clin Trials [serial online]. May 11, 1993;doc 56.
20. McKinin E, Sievert M, Johnson E, Mitchell J. The MEDLINE full-text research project. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1991;42:297-307.
21. Hersh W, Hickam D. An evaluation of interactive Boolean and natural language searching with an on-line medical textbook. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1995; 46:478-489.
22. Hersh W. Relevance and retrieval evaluation: perspectives from medicine. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1994; 45:201-206.
23. Kirby M, Miller N. MEDLINE searching on Colleague: reasons for failure or success of untrained users. Med Ref Serv Q. 1986;5:17-34.
24. Kingsland L, Harbourt A, Syed E, Schuyler P. COACH: applying UMLS knowledge sources in an expert searcher environment. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1993;81:178-183.
25. Walker C, McKibbon K, Haynes R, Ramsden M. Problems encountered by clinical end users of MEDLINE and Grateful Med. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1991;79:67-69.
26. Veenstra R. Clinical medical librarian impact on patient care: a one-year analysis. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1992;80:19-22.
27. Poisson E. End-user searching in medicine. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1986;74:293-299.
28. Ludwig L, Mixter J, Emanuelle M. User attitudes toward end-user literature searching. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1988;76:7-13.
29. Wallingford K, Humphreys B, Selinger N, Siegel E. Bibliographic retrieval: a survey of individual users of MEDLINE. MD Comput. 1990;7: 166-171.
30. Covell D, Uman G, Manning P. Information needs in office practice: are they being met? Ann Intern Med. 1985;103:596-599.
31. Gorman P, Helfand M. Information seeking in primary care: how physicians choose which clinical questions to pursue and which to leave unanswered. Med Decis Making. 1995;15:113-119.
32. Gorman P, Ash J, Wykoff L. Can primary care physicians' questions be answered using the medical literature? Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1994;82: 140-146.
33. Hersh W. Information Retrieval: A Health Care Perspective. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1996.
34. Johnson M, Langton K, Haynes R, Mathieu A. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on clinician performance and patient outcome. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:135-142.
35. Curley S, Connelly D, Rich E. Physicians' use of medical knowledge resources: preliminary theoretical framework and findings. Med Decis Making. 1990;10:231-241.