Abstract

BackgroundGeneral Practitioners (GPs) employ strategies to identify and retrieve medical evidence for clinical decision making which take workload and time constraints into account. Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT) initially developed to study animal foraging for food is used to explore the information searching behaviour of General Practitioners. This study is the first to apply foraging theory within this context.Study objectives were:1. To identify the sequence and steps deployed in identifiying and retrieving evidence for clinical decision making.2. To utilise Optimal Foraging Theory to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of General Practitioner information searching.MethodsGPs from the Wellington region of New Zealand were asked to document in a pre-formatted logbook the steps and outcomes of an information search linked to their clinical decision making, and fill in a questionnaire about their personal, practice and information-searching backgrounds.ResultsA total of 115/155 eligible GPs returned a background questionnaire, and 71 completed their information search logbook.GPs spent an average of 17.7 minutes addressing their search for clinical information. Their preferred information sources were discussions with colleagues (38% of sources) and books (22%). These were the two most profitable information foraging sources (15.9 min and 9.5 min search time per answer, compared to 34.3 minutes in databases). GPs nearly always accessed another source when unsuccessful (95% after 1st source), and frequently when successful (43% after 2nd source). Use of multiple sources accounted for 41% of searches, and increased search success from 70% to 89%.ConclusionsBy consulting in foraging terms the most 'profitable' sources of information (colleagues, books), rapidly switching sources when unsuccessful, and frequently double checking, GPs achieve an efficient trade-off between maximizing search success and information reliability, and minimizing searching time. As predicted by foraging theory, GPs trade time-consuming evidence-based (electronic) information sources for sources with a higher information reward per unit time searched. Evidence-based practice must accommodate these 'real world' foraging pressures, and Internet resources should evolve to deliver information as effectively as traditional methods of information gathering.

Highlights

  • General Practitioners (GPs) employ strategies to identify and retrieve medical evidence for clinical decision making which take workload and time constraints into account

  • By consulting in foraging terms the most ‘profitable’ sources of information, rapidly switching sources when unsuccessful, and frequently double checking, GPs achieve an efficient trade-off between maximizing search success and information reliability, and minimizing searching time

  • This paper describes a model for understanding GP information searching using Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT), developed to study patterns and strategies of animal foraging [10,11]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

General Practitioners (GPs) employ strategies to identify and retrieve medical evidence for clinical decision making which take workload and time constraints into account. 2. To utilise Optimal Foraging Theory to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of General Practitioner information searching. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is currently promoted as the best approach to facilitate the transfer of results from medical research to clinical practice [1]. Use of this evidence has been supported by the development of computerized information retrieval systems and evidence-based resource databases such as Medline and the Cochrane Library [2,3]. The primary barriers preventing physicians from answering clinical question were identified in several studies as “lack of time” and “information overload” [8,9]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.