直奔主题:评估护理点信息 (POCI) 资源在回答疾病相关问题方面的作用

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Rachel Leah Wasserman, Diane L. Seger, Mary G. Amato, Zoe Co, Aqsa Mugal, Angela Rui, Pamela M. Garabedian, Marlika Marceau, Ania Syrowatka, Lynn A. Volk, David W. Bates
{"title":"直奔主题:评估护理点信息 (POCI) 资源在回答疾病相关问题方面的作用","authors":"Rachel Leah Wasserman, Diane L. Seger, Mary G. Amato, Zoe Co, Aqsa Mugal, Angela Rui, Pamela M. Garabedian, Marlika Marceau, Ania Syrowatka, Lynn A. Volk, David W. Bates","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2024.1770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To evaluate the ability of DynaMedex, an evidence-based drug and disease Point of Care Information (POCI) resource, in answering clinical queries using keyword searches.\nMethods: Real-world disease-related questions compiled from clinicians at an academic medical center, DynaMedex search query data, and medical board review resources were categorized into five clinical categories (complications & prognosis, diagnosis & clinical presentation, epidemiology, prevention & screening/monitoring, and treatment) and six specialties (cardiology, endocrinology, hematology-oncology, infectious disease, internal medicine, and neurology). A total of 265 disease-related questions were evaluated by pharmacist reviewers based on if an answer was found (yes, no), whether the answer was relevant (yes, no), difficulty in finding the answer (easy, not easy), cited best evidence available (yes, no), clinical practice guidelines included (yes, no), and level of detail provided (detailed, limited details).\nResults: An answer was found for 259/265 questions (98%). Both reviewers found an answer for 241 questions (91%), neither found the answer for 6 questions (2%), and only one reviewer found an answer for 18 questions (7%). Both reviewers found a relevant answer 97% of the time when an answer was found. Of all relevant answers found, 68% were easy to find, 97% cited best quality of evidence available, 72% included clinical guidelines, and 95% were detailed. Recommendations for areas of resource improvement were identified.\nConclusions: The resource enabled reviewers to answer most questions easily with the best quality of evidence available, providing detailed answers and clinical guidelines, with a high level of replication of results across users.","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Straight to the point: evaluation of a Point of Care Information (POCI) resource in answering disease-related questions\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Leah Wasserman, Diane L. Seger, Mary G. Amato, Zoe Co, Aqsa Mugal, Angela Rui, Pamela M. Garabedian, Marlika Marceau, Ania Syrowatka, Lynn A. Volk, David W. Bates\",\"doi\":\"10.5195/jmla.2024.1770\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To evaluate the ability of DynaMedex, an evidence-based drug and disease Point of Care Information (POCI) resource, in answering clinical queries using keyword searches.\\nMethods: Real-world disease-related questions compiled from clinicians at an academic medical center, DynaMedex search query data, and medical board review resources were categorized into five clinical categories (complications & prognosis, diagnosis & clinical presentation, epidemiology, prevention & screening/monitoring, and treatment) and six specialties (cardiology, endocrinology, hematology-oncology, infectious disease, internal medicine, and neurology). A total of 265 disease-related questions were evaluated by pharmacist reviewers based on if an answer was found (yes, no), whether the answer was relevant (yes, no), difficulty in finding the answer (easy, not easy), cited best evidence available (yes, no), clinical practice guidelines included (yes, no), and level of detail provided (detailed, limited details).\\nResults: An answer was found for 259/265 questions (98%). Both reviewers found an answer for 241 questions (91%), neither found the answer for 6 questions (2%), and only one reviewer found an answer for 18 questions (7%). Both reviewers found a relevant answer 97% of the time when an answer was found. Of all relevant answers found, 68% were easy to find, 97% cited best quality of evidence available, 72% included clinical guidelines, and 95% were detailed. Recommendations for areas of resource improvement were identified.\\nConclusions: The resource enabled reviewers to answer most questions easily with the best quality of evidence available, providing detailed answers and clinical guidelines, with a high level of replication of results across users.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2024.1770\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2024.1770","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估基于证据的药物和疾病护理点信息(POCI)资源 DynaMedex 使用关键词搜索回答临床询问的能力:从学术医学中心临床医生、DynaMedex 搜索查询数据和医学委员会审查资源中收集的真实世界疾病相关问题被分为五个临床类别(并发症与预后、诊断与临床表现、流行病学、预防与筛查/监测、治疗)和六个专科(心脏病学、内分泌学、血液肿瘤学、传染病学、内科学和神经病学)。药剂师评审员根据是否找到答案(是、否)、答案是否相关(是、否)、找到答案的难度(容易、不容易)、引用的最佳证据(是、否)、包含的临床实践指南(是、否)以及提供的详细程度(详细、详细有限)对总共 265 个与疾病相关的问题进行了评估:结果:259/265 个问题找到了答案(98%)。两位审稿人都找到了 241 个问题的答案(91%),两位审稿人都没有找到 6 个问题的答案(2%),只有一位审稿人找到了 18 个问题的答案(7%)。在找到答案的情况下,两位评审员有 97% 都找到了相关答案。在所有找到的相关答案中,68%的答案很容易找到,97%的答案引用了质量最好的可用证据,72%的答案包含临床指南,95%的答案很详细。对资源改进方面提出了建议:该资源使审稿人能够利用现有的最佳证据质量轻松回答大多数问题,提供了详细的答案和临床指南,用户之间的结果重复率很高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Straight to the point: evaluation of a Point of Care Information (POCI) resource in answering disease-related questions
Objective: To evaluate the ability of DynaMedex, an evidence-based drug and disease Point of Care Information (POCI) resource, in answering clinical queries using keyword searches. Methods: Real-world disease-related questions compiled from clinicians at an academic medical center, DynaMedex search query data, and medical board review resources were categorized into five clinical categories (complications & prognosis, diagnosis & clinical presentation, epidemiology, prevention & screening/monitoring, and treatment) and six specialties (cardiology, endocrinology, hematology-oncology, infectious disease, internal medicine, and neurology). A total of 265 disease-related questions were evaluated by pharmacist reviewers based on if an answer was found (yes, no), whether the answer was relevant (yes, no), difficulty in finding the answer (easy, not easy), cited best evidence available (yes, no), clinical practice guidelines included (yes, no), and level of detail provided (detailed, limited details). Results: An answer was found for 259/265 questions (98%). Both reviewers found an answer for 241 questions (91%), neither found the answer for 6 questions (2%), and only one reviewer found an answer for 18 questions (7%). Both reviewers found a relevant answer 97% of the time when an answer was found. Of all relevant answers found, 68% were easy to find, 97% cited best quality of evidence available, 72% included clinical guidelines, and 95% were detailed. Recommendations for areas of resource improvement were identified. Conclusions: The resource enabled reviewers to answer most questions easily with the best quality of evidence available, providing detailed answers and clinical guidelines, with a high level of replication of results across users.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Medical Library Association
Journal of the Medical Library Association INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) is an international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly that aims to advance the practice and research knowledgebase of health sciences librarianship. The most current impact factor for the JMLA (from the 2007 edition of Journal Citation Reports) is 1.392.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信