Search

Objectives: Exploring clinical information-seeking behaviour (CISB) and its associated factors contributes to its theoretical advancement and offers a valuable framework for addressing physicians' information needs. This study delved into the dimensions, interactions, strategies and determinants of CISB among physicians at the point of care., Design: A grounded theory study was developed based on Strauss and Corbin's approach. Data were collected by semistructured interviews and then analysed through open, axial and selective coding., Setting: The study was conducted at academic centres affiliated with Isfahan University of Medical Sciences., Participants: This investigation involved recruiting 21 specialists and subspecialists from the academic centres., Results: The findings revealed that physicians' CISB encompassed multiple dimensions when addressing clinical inquiries. Seven principal themes emerged from the analysis: 'clinical information needs', 'clinical question characteristics', 'clinical information resources', 'information usability', 'factors influencing information seeking', 'action/interaction encountering clinical questions' and 'consequences of CISB'. The core category identified in this study was 'focused attention'., Conclusions: The theoretical explanation demonstrated that the CISB process was interactive and dynamic. Various stimuli, including causal, contextual and intervening conditions, guide physicians in adopting information-seeking strategies and focusing on resolving clinical challenges. However, insufficient stimuli may hinder physicians' engagement in CISB. Understanding CISB helps managers, policy-makers, clinical librarians and information system designers optimally implement several interventions, such as suitable training methods, reviewing monitoring and evaluating information systems, improving clinical decision support systems, electronic medical records and electronic health records, as well as monitoring and evaluating these systems. Such measures facilitate focused attention on clinical issues and promote CISB among physicians., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Numerous questions are generated for physicians during patient care. Facilitators and barriers affect the physicians' clinical information-seeking behaviour. While most health studies have focused on barriers, few have dealt with facilitators., Objective: This review aimed to identify facilitators in physicians' information-seeking behaviour to help respond to clinical questions raised during patient care., Methods: A narrative review was conducted, and 9 databases were searched. Selection criteria included original articles in the context of patient care and full-text articles published in the English language from 2002 to 2019. The articles were selected and analysed by group discussions., Results: Analysis of studies disclosed personal, technical and organisational facilitators including 26 themes. Internet utilisation and information searching skills, more available time, personal interests and knowing preferred sites or textbooks were among the personal factors. The most common technical factors included providing navigation support, and ease of searching and finding needed information. The most commonly reported factors at the organisational level are closeness to Internet facility and access during the consultation., Conclusion: Information systems designers, health service managers and librarians may need to work together to provide systems and settings that encourage doctors to seek information to answer their clinical questions during patient care., (© 2020 Health Libraries Group.)

Introduction: Physicians encounter a large number of questions during patient care. Therefore, finding high-quality evidence provides a good opportunity to improve patient care and continue learning., Objectives: The present study aims to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the physicians' clinical information-seeking behavior., Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. The Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, Emerald, Wiley Online Library, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were systematically searched based on the defined criteria. The inclusion criteria were the original articles in the context of patient care and full-text articles published in English from 2002 to 2017. The articles were reviewed, selected, and analyzed in group discussions., Results: Seventy-three articles met the study criteria. Therapy, diagnosis, and epidemiology ranked the highest ones among physicians' information needs. The mean frequency of questions raised during patient care was varied from 0.18 to 1.5 per patient, and the percentage of questions answered ranged between 22.8 and 93 %. The time taken to find the answers to the questions was between 2 to 32 min. Consultation with colleagues, alongside reviewing journal articles, Internet websites, textbooks, and MEDLINE/PubMed were the most frequently used sources reported in the retrieved articles. Further, common search strategies used by physicians included keywords, Boolean operators, similar medical terms, and advanced search. In addition, lack of time, and information searching skills and the unawareness of accessible sources were the most frequent barriers while easily searching and finding information and summaries and synthesized evidence-based materials mainly facilitated information seeking., Conclusions: Physicians increasingly encounter clinical point-of-care questions. However, the facilitation of accessing online information sources has not enabled the physicians to find answers to many of their questions. Considering the fact that they often refer to colleagues, Internet websites, and databases to find answers, the quality of information should be improved by evaluating the physicians' information-seeking behavior in the first stage, and developing information technology in a point-of-care environment, integrating EHR systems to communicate with colleagues, and accessing databases in the second stage., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)