Search

Access to community-based primary health care (hereafter, ‘primary care’) is a priority in many countries. Health care systems have emphasized policies that help the community ‘get the right service in the right place at the right time’. However, little is known about organizational interventions in primary care that are aimed to improve access for populations in situations of vulnerability (e.g., socioeconomically disadvantaged) and how successful they are. The purpose of this scoping review was to map the existing evidence on organizational interventions that improve access to primary care services for vulnerable populations. Scoping review followed an iterative process. Eligibility criteria: organizational interventions in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries; aiming to improve access to primary care for vulnerable populations; all study designs; published from 2000 in English or French; reporting at least one outcome (avoidable hospitalization, emergency department admission, or unmet health care needs). Sources: Main bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL) and team members’ personal files. Study selection: One researcher selected relevant abstracts and full text papers. Theory-driven synthesis: The researcher classified included studies using (i) the ‘Patient Centered Access to Healthcare’ conceptual framework (dimensions and outcomes of access to primary care), and (ii) the classification of interventions of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care. Using pattern analysis, interventions were mapped in accordance with the presence/absence of ‘dimension-outcome’ patterns. Out of 8,694 records (title/abstract), 39 studies with varying designs were included. The analysis revealed the following pattern. Results of 10 studies on interventions classified as ‘Formal integration of services’ suggested that these interventions were associated with three dimensions of access (approachability, availability and affordability) and reduction of hospitalizations (four/four studies), emergency department admissions (six/six studies), and unmet healthcare needs (five/six studies). These 10 studies included seven non-randomized studies, one randomized controlled trial, one quantitative descriptive study, and one mixed methods study. Our results suggest the limited breadth of research in this area, and that it will be feasible to conduct a full systematic review of studies on the effectiveness of the formal integration of services to improve access to primary care services for vulnerable populations.

Seventy six senior academics from 11 countries invite The BMJ ’s editors to reconsider their policy of rejecting qualitative research on the grounds of low priority. They challenge the journal to develop a proactive, scholarly, and pluralist approach to research that aligns with its stated mission

CONTEXT: Participatory research (PR) is the co-construction of research through partnerships between researchers and people affected by and/or responsible for action on the issues under study. Evaluating the benefits of PR is challenging for a number of reasons: the research topics, methods, and study designs are heterogeneous; the extent of collaborative involvement may vary over the duration of a project and from one project to the next; and partnership activities may generate a complex array of both short- and long-term outcomes. METHODS: Our review team consisted of a collaboration among researchers and decision makers in public health, research funding, ethics review, and community-engaged scholarship. We identified, selected, and appraised a large-variety sample of primary studies describing PR partnerships, and in each stage, two team members independently reviewed and coded the literature. We used key realist review concepts (middle-range theory, demi-regularity, and context-mechanism-outcome configurations [CMO]) to analyze and synthesize the data, using the PR partnership as the main unit of analysis. FINDINGS: From 7,167 abstracts and 591 full-text papers, we distilled for synthesis a final sample of twenty-three PR partnerships described in 276 publications. The link between process and outcome in these partnerships was best explained using the middle-range theory of partnership synergy, which demonstrates how PR can (1) ensure culturally and logistically appropriate research, (2) enhance recruitment capacity, (3) generate professional capacity and competence in stakeholder groups, (4) result in productive conflicts followed by useful negotiation, (5) increase the quality of outputs and outcomes over time, (6) increase the sustainability of project goals beyond funded time frames and during gaps in external funding, and (7) create system changes and new unanticipated projects and activities. Negative examples illustrated why these outcomes were not a guaranteed product of PR partnerships but were contingent on key aspects of context. CONCLUSIONS: We used a realist approach to embrace the heterogeneity and complexity of the PR literature. This theory-driven synthesis identified mechanisms by which PR may add value to the research process. Using the middle-range theory of partnership synergy, our review confirmed findings from previous PR reviews, documented and explained some negative outcomes, and generated new insights into the benefits of PR regarding conflicts and negotiation between stakeholders, program sustainability and advancement, unanticipated project activity, and the generation of systemic change.

Systematic literature reviews provide best evidence, but are underused by clinicians. Thus, integrating Cochrane reviews into continuing medical education (CME) is challenging. We designed a pilot CME program where summaries of Cochrane reviews (Courriels Cochrane) were disseminated by e-mail. Program participants automatically received CME credit for each Courriel Cochrane they rated. The feasibility of this program is reported (delivery, participation, and participant evaluation).We recruited French-speaking physicians through the Canadian Medical Association. Program delivery and participation were documented. Participants rated the informational value of Courriels Cochrane using the Information Assessment Method (IAM), which documented their reflective learning (relevance, cognitive impact, use for a patient, expected health benefits). IAM responses were aggregated and analyzed.The program was delivered as planned. Thirty Courriels Cochrane were delivered to 985 physicians, and 127 (12.9%) completed at least one IAM questionnaire. Out of 1109 Courriels Cochrane ratings, 973 (87.7%) conta-ined 1 or more types of positive cognitive impact, while 835 (75.3%) were clinically relevant. Participants reported the use of information for a patient and expected health benefits in 595 (53.7%) and 569 (51.3%) ratings, respectively.Program delivery required partnering with 5 organizations. Participants valued Courriels Cochrane. IAM ratings documented their reflective learning. The aggregation of IAM ratings documented 3 levels of CME outcomes: participation, learning, and performance. This evaluation study demonstrates the feasibility of the Courriels Cochrane as an approach to further disseminate Cochrane systematic literature reviews to clinicians and document self-reported knowledge translation associated with Cochrane reviews.

Inspired by the acquisition–cognition–application model (T. Saracevic & K.B. Kantor, 1997), we developed a tool called the Information Assessment Method to more clearly understand how physicians use clinical information. In primary healthcare, we conducted a naturalistic and longitudinal study of searches for clinical information. Forty-one family physicians received a handheld computer with the Information Assessment Method linked to one commercial electronic knowledge resource. Over an average of 320 days, 83% of 2,131 searches for clinical information were rated using the Information Assessment Method. Searches to address a clinical question, as well as the retrieval of relevant clinical information, were positively associated with the use of that information for a specific patient. Searches done out of curiosity were negatively associated with the use of clinical information. We found significant associations between specific types of cognitive impact and information use for a specific patient. For example, when the physician reported “My practice was changed and improved” as a result of this clinical information, the odds that information was used for a specific patient increased threefold. Our findings provide empirical data to support the applicability of the acquisition-cognition-application model, as operationalized through the Information Assessment Method, in primary healthcare. Capturing the use of research-based information in medicine opens the door to further study of the relationships between clinical information and health outcomes. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Item does not contain fulltext RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Following increased interest in having inter-professional (IP) health care teams engage patients in decision making, we developed a conceptual model for an IP approach to shared decision making (SDM) in primary care. We assessed the validity of the model with stakeholders in Canada. METHODS: In 15 individual interviews and 7 group interviews with 79 stakeholders, we asked them to: (1) propose changes to the IP-SDM model; (2) identify barriers and facilitators to the model's implementation in clinical practice; and (3) assess the model using a theory appraisal questionnaire. We performed a thematic analysis of the transcripts and a descriptive analysis of the questionnaires. RESULTS: Stakeholders suggested placing the patient at its centre; extending the concept of family to include significant others; clarifying outcomes; highlighting the concept of time; merging the micro, meso and macro levels in one figure; and recognizing the influence of the environment and emotions. The most common barriers identified were time constraints, insufficient resources and an imbalance of power among health professionals. The most common facilitators were education and training in inter-professionalism and SDM, motivation to achieve an IP approach to SDM, and mutual knowledge and understanding of disciplinary roles. Most stakeholders considered that the concepts and relationships between the concepts were clear and rated the model as logical, testable, having clear schematic representation, and being relevant to inter-professional collaboration, SDM and primary care. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders validated the new IP-SDM model for primary care settings and proposed few modifications. Future research should assess if the model helps implement SDM in IP clinical practice.

Background This study is born from a partnership between Web editors of Naître et grandir (N&G) and AboutKidsHealth (AKH) and researchers who developed and validated the Information Assessment Method (IAM). N&G and AKH are popular Canadian websites with high-quality comprehensive information about child development, education, health, and well-being. IAM allows parents to assess online information and provide feedback to Web editors. High-quality online consumer health information improves knowledge, self-efficacy, and health. However, low-socioeconomic status (SES) parents underuse N&G and IAM, despite these parents being more likely to report decreased worries and increased confidence as outcomes from N&G information. Objective The study is aimed to improve low-SES parents’ use of online child information and interaction with Web editors and explore subsequent health outcomes for parents and children. Methods Multiphase mixed-methods design. Our general approach is centered on organizational participatory research. In phase 1, we will conduct a qualitative interpretive study to identify barriers and facilitators to using N&G information and to interacting with N&G editors via IAM; interview more than 10 low-SES parents about their experience with N&G and IAM and more than 10 nonusers of N&G and IAM; and use thematic analysis to identify main barriers and facilitators. In phase 2, we will integrate parents’ views (phase 1 findings) in N&G and IAM and implement a new version: IAM+N&G+. In phase 3, we will conduct a quantitative prospective longitudinal study (pre-/postimplementation monitoring of knowledge use and outcomes). We will compare the use of original (IAM and N&G) and new (IAM+ and N&G+) versions using Google Analytics variables, IAM variables, a material and social deprivation index, and demographics. We anticipate increased use post implementation (linear mixed modeling). In phase 4, we will conduct a qualitative descriptive study on outcomes of information use. We will interview more than 30 low-SES parents who receive and rate the N&G+ newsletter using IAM+ and analyze data in the form of life histories to describe how parents and children experience perceived outcomes. Results The project was funded in 2017 by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and received an ethics approval by the McGill University’s institutional review board. Data collection for phase 1 was completed in 2018. Phases 2 to 4 will be conducted until 2020. Findings from this study will also be used to develop a free toolkit, useful to all Web editors, with recommendations for improving health information for low-SES persons and interactions with them using IAM. Conclusions The results of this study will provide a deep understanding of how low-SES parents use online child information and interact with Web editors. Following the implementation of IAM+N&G+, results will also elucidate subsequent health outcomes for low-SES parents and children after interaction with Web editors has been optimized. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/9996

IntroductionSignificant evidence in the literature supports case management (CM) as an effective intervention to improve care for patients with complex healthcare needs. However, there is still little evidence about the facilitators and barriers to CM implementation in primary care setting. The three specific objectives of this study are to: (1) identify the facilitators and barriers of CM implementation in primary care clinics across Canada; (2) explain and understand the relationships between the actors, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes of the CM intervention; (3) identify the next steps towards CM spread in primary care across Canada.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a multiple-case embedded mixed methods study. CM will be implemented in 10 primary care clinics in five Canadian provinces. Three different units of analysis will be embedded to obtain an in-depth understanding of each case: the healthcare system (macro level), the CM intervention in the clinics (meso level) and the individual/patient (micro level). For each objective, the following strategy will be performed: (1) an implementation analysis, (2) a realist evaluation and (3) consensus building among stakeholders using the Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts method.Ethics and disseminationThis study, which received ethics approval, will provide innovative knowledge about facilitators and barriers to implementation of CM in different primary care jurisdictions and will explain how and why different mechanisms operate in different contexts to generate different outcomes among frequent users. Consensual and prioritised statements about next steps for spread of CM in primary care from the perspectives of all stakeholders will be provided. Our results will offer context-sensitive explanations that can better inform local practices and policies and contribute to improve the health of patients with complex healthcare needs who frequently use healthcare services. Ultimately, this will increase the performance of healthcare systems and specifically mitigate ineffective use and costs.

Rationale and objective The information assessment method (IAM) permits health professionals to systematically document the relevance, cognitive impact, use and health outcomes of information objects delivered by or retrieved from electronic knowledge resources. The companion review paper (Part 1) critically examined the literature, and proposed a ‘Push-Pull-Acquisition-Cognition-Application’ evaluation framework, which is operationalized by IAM. The purpose of the present paper (Part 2) is to examine the content validity of the IAM cognitive checklist when linked to email alerts. Methods A qualitative component of a mixed methods study was conducted with 46 doctors reading and rating research-based synopses sent on email. The unit of analysis was a doctor's explanation of a rating of one item regarding one synopsis. Interviews with participants provided 253 units that were analysed to assess concordance with item definitions. Results and conclusion The content relevance of seven items was supported. For three items, revisions were needed. Interviews suggested one new item. This study has yielded a 2008 version of IAM.

Rationale Methods to systematically assess electronic knowledge resources by health professionals may enhance evaluation of these resources, knowledge exchange between information users and providers, and continuing professional development. We developed the Information Assessment Method (IAM) to document health professional perspectives on the relevance, cognitive impact, potential use and expected health outcomes of information delivered by (push) or retrieved from (pull) electronic knowledge resources. However, little is known about push communication in health sciences, and what we propose to call clinical emailing channels (CECs). CECs can be understood as a communication infrastructure that channels clinically relevant research knowledge, email alerts, from information providers to the inboxes of individual practitioners. Aims In two companion papers, our objectives are to (part 1) explore CEC evaluation in routine practice, and (part 2) examine the content validity of the cognitive component of IAM. Methods The present paper (part 1) critically reviews the literature in health sciences and four disciplines: communication, information studies, education and knowledge translation. Our review addresses the following questions. What are CECs? How are they assessed? Results The review contributes to better define CECs, and proposes a ‘push-pull-acquisition-cognition-application’ evaluation framework, which is operationalized by IAM. Conclusion Compared with existing evaluation tools, our review suggests IAM is comprehensive, generic and systematic.

This systematic review of mixed methods studies focuses on factors that can facilitate or limit the implementation of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in clinical settings. Systematic searches of relevant bibliographic databases identified studies about interventions promoting ICT adoption by healthcare professionals. Content analysis was performed by two reviewers using a specific grid. One hundred and one (101) studies were included in the review. Perception of the benefits of the innovation (system usefulness) was the most common facilitating factor, followed by ease of use. Issues regarding design, technical concerns, familiarity with ICT, and time were the most frequent limiting factors identified. Our results suggest strategies that could effectively promote the successful adoption of ICT in healthcare professional practices.

Introduction:Systematic mixed studies reviews are a type of systematic review that combine qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. They are gaining in popularity due to their potential for providing in-depth answers to complex clinical problems and practical concerns. However, several challenges are encountered in systematic mixed studies reviews because of the heterogeneity of included study designs. One of these challenges is related to the quality appraisal of included studies. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool for assessing the quality of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies was developed in 2007: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this project was to strengthen the content validity of the MMAT.Methods:A new version of the MMAT was developed using the results from a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts (n = 73) to identify the core relevant criteria to include in the MMAT.Results:The results of this project and the new version of the MMAT will be presented. The MMAT has three main characteristics. First, it can be used for different study designs since it includes criteria for qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. Second, the MMAT focuses on the core relevant methodological criteria and has five criteria per category of study. Third, it includes specific criteria for assessing mixed methods studies.Conclusions:Currently, there exists over 500 critical appraisal tools, making the task of selecting the proper tools for use in systematic mixed studies reviews more difficult. The MMAT offers an alternative solution by proposing a unique tool that can appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more time efficient assessment.

Introduction: The importance of reflective practice is recognized by the adoption of a reflective learning model in continuing medical education (CME), but little is known about how to evaluate reflective learning in CME. Reflective learning seldom is defined in terms of specific cognitive processes or observable performances. Competency-based evaluation rarely is used for evaluating CME effects. To bridge this gap, reflective learning was defined operationally in a reflective learning framework (RLF). The operationalization supports observations, documentation, and evaluation of reflective learning performances in CME, and in clinical practice. In this study, the RLF was refined and validated as physician performance was evaluated in a CME e-learning activity. Methods: Qualitative multiple-case study wherein 473 practicing family physicians commented on research-based synopses after reading and rating them as an on-line CME learning activity. These comments formed 2029 cases from which cognitive tasks were extracted as defined by the RLF with the use of a thematic analysis. Frequencies of cognitive tasks were compared in a cross-case analysis. Results: Four RLF cognitive processes and 12 tasks were supported. Reflective learning was defined as 4 interrelated cognitive processes: Interpretation, Validation, Generalization, and Change, which were specified by 3 observable cognitive tasks, respectively. These 12 tasks and related characteristics were described in an RLF codebook for future use. Discussion: Reflective learning performances of family physicians were evaluated. The RLF and its codebook can be used for integrating reflective learning into CME curricula and for developing competency-based assessment. Future research on potential uses of the RLF should involve participation of CME stakeholders.

In mixed methods studies, novice researchers need to know that qualitative and quantitative data or results sometimes diverge. However, few studies focus on this aspect of mixed methods research. The present paper aims to review the literature on divergence of qualitative and quantitative evidence, and describe examples. The prior literature reveals four strategies for taking divergence into account: reconciliation, initiation, bracketing and exclusion. Nine examples derived from empirical studies were found, and they are described. Then, a detailed example is given of how divergence was identified and explored in a pilot study of the implementation of one electronic knowledge resource on handheld computer in an academic family medicine clinic. Finally, this worked example is described in the context of a teaching exercise for novice researchers.

We conducted a prospective observational study to (1) determine usage and construct validity of a method to gauge the cognitive impact of information derived from daily e-mail, and (2) describe self-reported impacts of research-based synopses ( InfoPOEMs ) delivered as e-mail. Ratings of InfoPOEMs using an Impact assessment scale provided (a) data on usage of the impact assessment method, (b) reports of impact by InfoPOEM and by doctor and (c) data for analysis of construct validity of the scale. Participants were family physicians or general practitioners who rated at least five InfoPOEMs delivered on e-mail. For each InfoPOEM rated, 0.1 continuing education credit was awarded by the College of Family Physicians of Canada. Use of the impact assessment scale linked to a daily InfoPOEM was sustained during the 150-day study period. 1,007 participants submitted 61,493 reports of ‘cognitive impact’ by rating on average 61 InfoPOEMs (range 5–111). ‘ I learned something new ’ was most frequently reported. ‘ I was frustrated as there was not enough information or nothing useful ’ was the most frequently reported negative type of impact. The proportion of reports of ‘No Impact’ varied substantially across individual InfoPOEMs . Impact patterns suggested an 8 or 9-factor solution. Our Impact assessment method facilitates knowledge transfer by promoting two-way exchange between providers of health information and family doctors. Providers of health information can use this method to better understand the impact of research-based synopses. Sustaining current practice and increasing knowledge about new developments in medicine are important outcomes arising from research-based synopses delivered as e-mail, in addition to practice change.

Electronic Knowledge Resources (EKRs) are increasingly used by physicians, but their situational relevance has not been systematically examined. Objective: Systematically scrutinize the situational relevance of EKR-derived information items in and outside clinical settings. Background: Physicians use EKRs to accomplish four cognitive objectives (C1–4), and three organizational objectives (O1-3): (C1) Answer questions/solve problems/support decision-making in a clinical context; (C2) fulfill educational-research objectives; (C3) search for personal interest or curiosity; (C4) overcome limits of human memory; (O1) share information with patients, families, or caregivers; (O2) exchange information with other health professionals; (O3) plan-manage-monitor tasks with other health professionals. Methods: Longitudinal mixed methods multiple case study: Cases were 17 residents' critical searches for information, using a commercial EKR, during a 2-month block of family practice. Usage data were automatically recorded. Each “opened” item of information was linked to an impact assessment questionnaire, and 1,981 evaluations of items were documented. Interviews with residents were guided by log files, which tracked use and impact of EKR-derived information items. Thematic analysis identified 156 critical searches linked to 877 information items. For each case, qualitative data were assigned to one of the seven proposed objectives. Results: Residents achieved their search objectives in 85.9% of cases (situational relevance). Additional sources of information were sought in 52.6% of cases. Results support the seven proposed objectives, levels of comparative relevance (less, equally, more), and levels of stimulation of learning and knowledge (individual, organizational). Conclusion: Our method of systematic assessment may contribute to user-based evaluation of EKRs.

Background: The rationale for conducting mixed-method studies is usually based on the desire to combine the complementary strengths of qualitative and quantitative research. Typically, the former provides in-depth descriptions offering strong internal validity while the latter provides strong external validity. The exclusive use of quantitative methods in mental health research presents certain limitations which lie in the subjective nature of mental health problems and related behaviors, and the fact that these are mediated by cultural context.Aims and methods: This paper illustrates, along with the Pathway and Barriers to Mental Health project, the usefulness of using a mixed-method design to study mental health problems and related behaviors in a culturally diverse community.Results: The results show how the various quantitative and qualitative stages of the project were implemented in a Sequential Transformative Design that allows for a better identification and understanding of community mental healt...

Background Information retrieval in primary care is becoming more difficult as the volume of medical information held in electronic databases expands. The lexical structure of this information might permit automatic indexing and improved retrieval. Objective To determine the possibility of identifying the key elements of clinical studies, namely Patient_Population_Problem, Exposure_Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Duration and Results (PECODR), from abstracts of medical journals. Methods We used a convenience sample of 20 synopses from the journal Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and their matching original journal article abstracts obtained from PubMed. Three independent primary care professionals identified PECODR-related extracts of text. Rules were developed to define each PECODR element and the selection process of characters, words, phrases and sentences. From the extracts of text related to PECODR elements, potential lexical patterns that might help identify those elements were proposed and assessed using NVivo software. Results A total of 835 PECODR-related text extracts containing 41 263 individual text characters were identified from 20 EBM journal synopses. There were 759 extracts in the corresponding PubMed abstracts containing 31 947 characters. PECODR elements were found in nearly all abstracts and synopses with the exception of duration. There was agreement on 86.6%of the extracts from the 20 EBM synopses and 85.0% on the corresponding PubMed abstracts. After consensus this rose to 98.4% and 96.9% respectively. We found potential text patterns in the Comparison, Outcome and Results elements of both EBM synopses and PubMed abstracts. Some phrases and words are used frequently and are specific for these elements in both synopses and abstracts. Conclusions Results suggest a PECODR-related structure exists in medical abstracts and that there might be lexical patterns specific to these elements. More sophisticated computer-assisted lexical-semantic analysis might refine these results, and pave the way to automating PECODR indexing, and improve information retrieval in primary care.

Background Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) is an approach in which researchers and community stakeholders form equitable partnerships to tackle issues related to community health improvement and knowledge production. Our 2012 realist review of CBPR outcomes reported long-term effects that were touched upon but not fully explained in the retained literature. To further explore such effects, interviews were conducted with academic and community partners of partnerships retained in the review. Realist methodology was used to increase the understanding of what supports partnership synergy in successful long-term CBPR partnerships, and to further document how equitable partnerships can result in numerous benefits including the sustainability of relationships, research and solutions. Methods Building on our previous realist review of CBPR, we contacted the authors of longitudinal studies of academic-community partnerships retained in the review. Twenty-four participants (community members and researchers) from 11 partnerships were interviewed. Realist logic of analysis was used, involving middle-range theory, context-mechanism-outcome configuration (CMOcs) and the concept of the ‘ripple effect’. Results The analysis supports the central importance of developing and strengthening partnership synergy through trust. The ripple effect concept in conjunction with CMOcs showed that a sense of trust amongst CBPR members was a prominent mechanism leading to partnership sustainability. This in turn resulted in population-level outcomes including: (a) sustaining collaborative efforts toward health improvement; (b) generating spin-off projects; and (c) achieving systemic transformations. Conclusion These results add to other studies on improving the science of CBPR in partnerships with a high level of power-sharing and co-governance. Our results suggest sustaining CBPR and achieving unanticipated benefits likely depend on trust-related mechanisms and a continuing commitment to power-sharing. These findings have implications for building successful CBPR partnerships to address challenging public health problems and the complex assessment of outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1949-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundChronic diseases are the leading cause of death (63%) worldwide. A key behavioral risk factor is unhealthy eating. New strategies must be identified and evaluated to improve dietary habits. Social media, such as blogs, represent a unique opportunity for improving knowledge translation in health care through interactive communication between health consumers and health professionals. Despite the proliferation of food and lifestyle blogs, no research has been devoted to understanding potential blog readers’ perceptions of healthy eating blogs written by dietitians. ObjectiveTo identify women’s salient beliefs and perceptions regarding the use of healthy eating blogs written by dietitians promoting the improvement of their dietary habits. MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study with female Internet users living in the Quebec City, QC, area with suboptimal dietary habits. First, the women explored 4 existing healthy eating blogs written in French by qualified dietitians. At a focus group 2-4 weeks later, they were asked to discuss their experience and perceptions. Focus group participants were grouped by age (18-34, 35-54, and 55-75 years) and by their use of social media (users/nonusers). Using a questionnaire based on the Theory of Planned Behavior, participants were asked to identify salient beliefs underlying their attitudes (advantages/disadvantages), subjective norms (what people important to them would think), and perceptions of control (facilitators/barriers) regarding the use of a healthy eating blog written by a dietitian to improve dietary habits. Discussion groups were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, coded, and a deductive content analysis was performed independently by 2 individuals using the NVivo software (version 10). ResultsAll participants (N=33) were Caucasian women aged between 22 to 73 year. Main advantages perceived of using healthy eating blogs written by a dietitian were that they provided useful recipe ideas, improved lifestyle, were a credible source of information, and allowed interaction with a dietitian. Disadvantages included increased time spent on the Internet and guilt if recommendations were not followed. Important people who would approve were family, colleagues, and friends. Important people who could disapprove were family and doctors. Main facilitators were visually attractive blogs, receiving an email notification about new posts, and finding new information on the blog. Main barriers were too much text, advertising on the blog, and lack of time. ConclusionsThe women in this study valued the credibility of healthy eating blogs written by dietitians and the contact with dietitians they provided. Identifying salient beliefs underlying women’s perceptions of using such blogs provides an empirically supported basis for the design of knowledge translation interventions to help prevent chronic diseases.

Background Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been steadily increasing in popularity since their introduction to US markets in 2007. Debates surrounding the proper regulatory mechanisms needed to mitigate potential harms associated with their use have focused on youth access, their potential for nicotine addiction, and the renormalization of a smoking culture. The objective of this study was to describe the enacted and planned regulations addressing this novel public health concern in the US. Methods We searched LexisNexis Academic under Federal Regulations and Registers, as well as State Administrative Codes and Registers. This same database was also used to find information about planned regulations in secondary sources. The search was restricted to US documents produced between January 1st, 2004, and July 14th, 2014. Results We found two planned regulations at the federal level, and 74 enacted and planned regulations in 44 states. We identified six state-based regulation types, including i) access, ii) usage, iii) marketing and advertisement, iv) packaging, v) taxation, and vi) licensure. These were further classified into 10 restriction subtypes: sales, sale to minors, use in indoor public places, use in limited venues, use by minors, licensure, marketing and advertising, packaging, and taxation. Most enacted restrictions aimed primarily to limit youth access, while few regulations enforced comprehensive restrictions on product use and availability. Conclusions Current regulations targeting e-cigarettes in the US are varied in nature and scope. There is greater consensus surrounding youth protection (access by minors and/or use by minors, and/or use in limited venues), with little consensus on multi-level regulations, including comprehensive use bans in public spaces. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0370-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background There is a large volume of health information available, and, if applied in clinical practice, may contribute to effective patient care. Despite an abundance of information, sub-optimal care is common. Many factors influence practitioners’ use of health information, and format (electronic or other) may be one such factor. Objectives To assess the effects of interventions aimed at improving or increasing healthcare practitioners’ use of electronic health information (EHI) on professional practice and patient outcomes. Search methods We searched The Cochrane Library (Wiley), MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), and LISA (EBSCO) up toNovember 2013. We contacted researchers in the field and scanned reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria We included studies that evaluated the effects of interventions to improve or increase the use of EHI by healthcare practitioners onprofessional practice and patient outcomes. We defined EHI as information accessed on a computer. We defined ’use’ as logging into EHI. We considered any healthcare practitioner involved in patient care. We included randomized, non-randomized, and cluster randomized controlled trials (RCTs, NRCTs, CRCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time series (ITS), and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs).The comparisonswere: electronic versus printed health information; EHI on different electronic devices (e.g. desktop, laptop or tablet computers, etc.; cell / mobile phones); EHI via different user interfaces; EHI provided with or without an educational or training component; and EHI compared to no other type or source of information. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias for each study. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the included studies. We reassessed previously excluded studies following our decision to define logins to EHI as a measure of professional behavior. We reported results in natural units. When possible, we calculated and reported median effect size (odds ratio (OR), interquartile ranges (IQR)). Due to high heterogeneity across studies, meta-analysis was not feasible. Main results We included two RCTs and four CRCTs involving 352 physicians, 48 residents, and 135 allied health practitioners. Overall risk of bias was low as was quality of the evidence. One comparison was supported by three studies and three comparisons were supported by single studies, but outcomes across the three studies were highly heterogeneous. We found no studies to support EHI versus no alternative. Given these factors, it was not possible to determine the relative effectiveness of interventions. All studies reported practitioner use of EHI, two reported on compliance with electronic practice guidelines, and none reported on patient outcomes. One trial (139 participants) measured guideline adherence for an electronic versus printed guideline, but reported no difference between groups (median OR 0.85, IQR 0.74 to 1.08). One small cross-over trial (10 participants) reported increased use of clinical guidelines when provided with a mobile versus stationary, desktop computer (mean use per shift: intervention group (IG) 3.6, standard deviation (SD) 1.7 vs. control group (CG) 2.0 (SD1.9), P value = 0.033). One cross-over trial (203 participants) reported that using a customized versus a generic interface had little impact on practitioners’ use of EHI (mean difference in adjusted end-of-study rate: 0.77 logins/ month/user, 95% confidence interval (CI) CI 0.43 to 1.11). Three trials included education or training and reported increased use of EHI by practitioners following training. Authors’ conclusions This review provided no evidence that the use of EHI translates into improved clinical practice or patient outcomes, though it does suggest that when practitioners are provided with EHI and education or training, the use of EHI increases. We have defined use as the activity of logging into an EHI resource, but based on our findings use does not automatically translate to the application of EHI in practice. While using EHI may be an important component of evidence-based medicine, alone it is insufficient to improve patient care or clinical practices. For EHI to be applied in patient care, it will be necessary to understand why practitioners’ are reluctant to apply EHI when treating people, and to determine the most effective way(s) to reduce this reluctance. ispartof: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews vol:2015 issue:3 ispartof: location:England status: published

Objectives. To undertake a critical review describing key strategies supporting development of participatory research (PR) teams to engage partners for creation and translation of action-oriented knowledge.Methods. Sources are four leading PR practitioners identified via bibliometric analysis. Authors’ publications were identified in January 1995–October 2009 in PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science and CAB databases, and books. Works were limited to those with a process description describing a research project and practitioners were first, second, third, or last author.Results. Adapting and applying the “Reliability Tested Guidelines for Assessing Participatory Research Projects” to retained records identified five key strategies: developing advisory committees of researchers and intended research users; developing research agreements; using formal and informal group facilitation techniques; hiring co-researchers/partners from community; and ensuring frequent communication. Other less frequently mentioned strategies were also identified.Conclusion. This review is the first time these guidelines were used to identify key strategies supporting PR projects. They proved effective at identifying and evaluating engagement strategies as reported by completed research projects. Adapting these guidelines identified gaps where the tool was unable to assess fundamental PR elements of power dynamics, equity of resources, and member turnover. Our resulting template serves as a new tool to measure partnerships.

Contains fulltext : 138964.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) INTRODUCTION: Case management allows us to respond to the complex needs of a vulnerable clientele through a structured approach that promotes enhanced interaction between partners. Syntheses on the subject converge towards a need for a better description of the relationships between programmes and their local context, as well as the characteristics of the clienteles and programmes that contribute to positive impacts. The purpose of this project is thus to describe and evaluate the case management programmes of four health and social services centres in the Saguenay-Lac- Saint-Jean region of Quebec, Canada, in order to inform their improvement while creating knowledge on case management that can be useful in other contexts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This research relies on a multiple embedded case study design based on a developmental evaluation approach. We will work with the case management programme for high users of hospital services of each centre. Three different units of analysis will be interwoven to obtain an in-depth understanding of each case, that is: (1) health and social services centre and local services network, (2) case management programme and (3) patients who are high users of services. Two strategies for programme evaluation (logic models and implementation analysis) will guide the mixed data collection based on qualitative and quantitative methods. This data collection will rely on: (1) individual interviews and focus groups; (2) participant observation; (3) document analysis; (4) clinical and administrative data and (5) questionnaires. Description and comparison of cases, and integration of qualitative and quantitative data will be used to guide the data analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Research Boards of the four health and social services centres (HSSCs) involved. Findings will be disseminated by publications in peer-reviewed journals, conferences, and policy and practice partners in local and national government.

This study examines the process by which a program becomes sustainable. In health promotion, sustainability is usually modeled as the final stage of a program's evolution. In practice, however, this stage model appears deceiving. This article proposes that processes for implementing programs and for ensuring their sustainability are concomitant. Using a multiple-case study methodology, we examined routinization—the sustainability process in organizations—of the Quebec Heart Health Demonstration Project in five community health centers over 10 years. Data came from documents and interviews. The analysis considered themes using the Critical Incident Technique. Our results suggest routinization-related events occurred as soon as the project began, and the occurrence of specific routinization events foresaw the presence of program-related routines. These events were concomitant with those associated with implementation. This supports the proposition. It suggests health promoters should consider program sustainability from the very beginning, and can take inspiration from the events presented herein when looking for ways to influence the sustainability of their programs.

Physician organisationsi recognise that searching quality knowledge resources at the point of care is important for continuing medical education (CME).1 However, those physicians inclined to occasionally search for an answer to a clinical question do not have systems such as a CME module to integrate the key tasks of searching for clinical information in their electronic medical record (EMR) and reporting CME outcomes for credit. In regard to the task of searching for information, we acknowledge that some clinical questions remain difficult to answer, while other search tasks have become simpler (table 1). Among barriers to searching at the point of care is the perception that knowledge resources are too complicated to use.2 This perception is supported by an ethnographic study of general practitioners at work.3 However, knowledge resources are continuously improving and bandwidth is no longer an issue; so this perception may be regarded as anachronistic. View this table: Table 1 The complexity of searching during the consultation and relative frequency of task performance One way to facilitate searching in the encounter is to conceptualise the EMR as a venue for documentation of learning. By EMR, we mean a system whose primary function is the documentation of clinical encounters and the management of related patient health information including laboratory results and referral letters. In North America, organisations that accredit CME programs encourage physicians to …

SUMMARY Program sustainability is an ongoing concern for most people in health promotion. However, the current notion of sustainability in organizations, namely routinization, needs refinement. This article examines organizational routines. In so doing, it refines the notion of sustainability and the assessment of routines. Drawing on the organizational literature, a routinized program is defined by the presence of routinized activities, meaning that these activities exhibit four characteristics of organizational routines: memory, adaptation, values and rules. To answer the question of how these characteristics are useful, we conducted an empirical study of the routinization of the Quebec Heart Health Demonstration Project in five community health centers. Our method consisted of a multiple-case study. We observed project activities in each center in 2000. The data came from documents and interviews with project actors. Our results show that, in one of the centers, no resources had been officially committed to project activities. Even so, the actors continued some activities on an informal basis. In another center, the activities satisfied three of the four routine characteristics. In the three others, activities satisfied all of the characteristics. These results suggest focusing the study of program sustainability on the routinization of activities resulting from it. They indicate four distinct degrees of sustainability: (1) the absence of sustainability; no program activity is continued; (2) precarious sustainability; some residual activities are pursued, at least unofficially; (3) weak sustainability; the program produces some official activities that are not routinized; and (4) sustainability through routinization; routinized activities result from the program.

In public health, programs constitute an important method of improving health, and program sustainability is critical. Knowledge on sustainability raises nevertheless two major issues. The first concerns the social structures within which programs are sustained. The literature suggests different structures however only organizational structures, namely routines, are used for analysis. The second issue concerns the temporal aspect of sustainability that is typically conceived as the final phase of program development after the planning, implementation, and evaluation phases. This ‘stage’ model does not allow one to consider that sustainability must be prepared in advance, concomitantly with implementation. These structural and temporal dimensions ground our proposal to re-conceive sustainability. The literature on organizations defines two relevant social structures, one organizational (routines), and one institutional (standards). This in turn suggests three degrees of sustainability. We then emphasize how sustainability is concomitant with the implementation process, by exploring events that characterize these processes.

Disseminating health and medical information on the Internet can improve knowledge transfer from health professionals to the population, and help individuals to maintain and improve their health. There are currently several medical information websites that directly target the general population with the aim of providing information about health problems, self-care and prevention. However, this new technology also hides several shortcomings, such as: (i) uneven quality of medical information available on the Internet; (ii) difficulties in finding, understanding and using this information; (iii) lack of access for the unconnected population; and (iv) the potential for harm and risks of over-consumption. To be able to overcome these dangers, it is important that public health practitioners and health professionals be involved in the design, dissemination and evaluation of Web-based health and medical information.

IntroductionA common reason for frequent use of healthcare services is the complex healthcare needs of individuals suffering from multiple chronic conditions, especially in combination with mental health comorbidities and/or social vulnerability. Frequent users (FUs) of healthcare services are more at risk for disability, loss of quality of life and mortality. Case management (CM) is a promising intervention to improve care integration for FU and to reduce healthcare costs. This review aims to develop a middle-range theory explaining how CM in primary care improves outcomes among FU with chronic conditions, for what types of FU and in what circumstances.Methods and analysisA realist synthesis (RS) will be conducted between March 2017 and March 2018 to explore the causal mechanisms that underlie CM and how contextual factors influence the link between these causal mechanisms and outcomes. According to RS methodology, five steps will be followed: (1) focusing the scope of the RS; (2) searching for the evidence; (3) appraising the quality of evidence; (4) extracting the data; and (5) synthesising the evidence. Patterns in context–mechanism–outcomes (CMOs) configurations will be identified, within and across identified studies. Analysis of CMO configurations will help confirm, refute, modify or add to the components of our initial rough theory and ultimately produce a refined theory explaining how and why CM interventions in primary care works, in which contexts and for which FU with chronic conditions.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics is not required for this review, but publication guidelines on RS will be followed. Based on the review findings, we will develop and disseminate messages tailored to various relevant stakeholder groups. These messages will allow the development of material that provides guidance on the design and the implementation of CM in health organisations.Trial registration numberProspero CRD42017057753.

BackgroundElectronic knowledge resources constitute an important channel for accredited Continuing Medical Education (CME) activities. However, email usage for educational purposes is controversial. On the one hand, family physicians become aware of new information, confirm what they already know, and obtain reassurance by reading educational email alerts. Email alerts can also encourage physicians to search Web-based resources. On the other hand, technical difficulties and privacy issues are common obstacles. ObjectiveThe purpose of this discussion paper, informed by a literature review and a small qualitative study, was to understand family physicians’ knowledge, attitudes, and behavior in regard to email in general and educational emails in particular, and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of educational email alerts. In addition, we documented participants’ suggestions to improve email alert services for CME. MethodsWe conducted a qualitative descriptive study using the “Knowledge, Attitude, Behavior” model. We conducted semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 15 family physicians. We analyzed the collected data using inductive-deductive thematic qualitative data analysis. ResultsAll 15 participants scanned and prioritized their email, and 13 of them checked their email daily. Participants mentioned (1) advantages of educational email alerts such as saving time, convenience and valid information, and (2) disadvantages such as an overwhelming number of emails and irrelevance. They offered suggestions to improve educational email. ConclusionsThe advantages of email alerts seem to compensate for their disadvantages. Suggestions proposed by family physicians can help to improve educational email alerts.

Background Decision boxes (Dboxes) provide clinicians with research evidence about management options for medical questions that have no single best answer. Dboxes fulfil a need for rapid clinical training tools to prepare clinicians for clinician-patient communication and shared decision-making. We studied the barriers and facilitators to using the Dbox information in clinical practice. Methods We used a mixed methods study with sequential explanatory design. We recruited family physicians, residents, and nurses from six primary health-care clinics. Participants received eight Dboxes covering various questions by email (one per week). For each Dbox, they completed a web questionnaire to rate clinical relevance and cognitive impact and to assess the determinants of their intention to use what they learned from the Dbox to explain to their patients the advantages and disadvantages of the options, based on the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). Following the 8-week delivery period, we conducted focus groups with clinicians and interviews with clinic administrators to explore contextual factors influencing the use of the Dbox information. Results One hundred clinicians completed the web surveys. In 54% of the 496 questionnaires completed, they reported that their practice would be improved after having read the Dboxes, and in 40%, they stated that they would use this information for their patients. Of those who would use the information for their patients, 89% expected it would benefit their patients, especially in that it would allow the patient to make a decision more in keeping with his/her personal circumstances, values, and preferences. They intended to use the Dboxes in practice (mean 5.6 ± 1.2, scale 1–7, with 7 being “high”), and their intention was significantly related to social norm, perceived behavioural control, and attitude according to the TPB (P

Health professionals may follow original research via synopses received on e-mail. Synopses are written from original studies selected for validity and relevance. We explored professionals’ concerns about synopses (qualitative multiple case study). Of 28 participants, 17 (60.7%) reported concerns: 15 with the content of synopses and four with the format.Les professionnels de la santé reçoivent des synopsis de recherche originale par courriel (synopsis d’articles sélectionnés pour leur pertinence et leur validité). Nous avons exploré les préoccupations des professionnels concernant les synopsis (étude de cas multiple – recherche qualitative). Parmi 28 participants, 17 (60,7 %) avaient des préoccupations : 15 avec le contenu des synopsis et quatre avec le format.

A new impact assessment method facilitates knowledge transfer by promoting a two-way exchange between providers of health information and family doctors. Participants reported a high degree of conceptual use of email alerts. Interviews (research-in-progress) will document the meaning of all ten scale items in support of the content validity of the method.Une nouvelle méthode d’évaluation facilitant le transfert des connaissances préconise l’échange réciproque entre les fournisseurs d’information médicale et les médecins de famille. Les participants indiquent un haut degré d’utilisation conceptuelle des avis reçus par courriel. Des entrevues (en cours de réalisation) fourniront des renseignements sur les dix facteurs sur lesquels est basée la validité de contenu de cette méthode.

This poster presents the methodology of a doctoral dissertation project in progress. The objective of the project is to understand the factors involved in developing a user feedback management process. This project is part of a Participatory Action Research (PAR) with the Canadian Pharmacists Association (CPhA).Cette affiche présente la méthodologie d’une étude doctorale en cours. L’objectif du projet est de comprendre les facteurs importants dans le développement d’un processus de gestion de la rétroaction des usagers. Ce projet s’inscrit dans le cadre d’une recherche-action participative avec l’Association des pharmaciens du Canada (APhC).

Pharmacists represent a unique group of health information users. This study examines their feedback with regard to a health information resource, and reports on the usefulness of that feedback from the information provider’s perspective. It is part of a doctoral dissertation on using health professionals’ feedback for improving health information resources.Les pharmaciens représentent un groupe unique d’utilisateurs d’information sur la santé. Cette étude examine la rétroaction qu’ils fournissent en matière de ressources d’information sur la santé et les rapports sur l’utilité des commentaires du point de vue du fournisseur. L’étude s’inscrit dans le cadre d’une étude doctorale sur l’utilisation des commentaires des professionnels de la santé afin d’améliorer les ressources d’information sur la santé.

Background The Information Assessment Method (IAM) is a popular tool for continuing education and knowledge translation. After a search for information, the IAM allows the health professional to report what was the search objective, its cognitive impact, as well as any use and patient health benefit associated with the retrieved health information. In continuing education programs, professionals read health information, rate it using the IAM, and earn continuing education credit for this brief individual reflective learning activity. IAM items have been iteratively developed using literature reviews and qualitative studies. Thus, our research question was: what is the content validity of IAM items from the users’ perspective? Methods A two-step content validation study was conducted. In Step 1, we followed a mixed methods research design, and assessed the relevance and representativeness of IAM items. In this step, data from a longitudinal quantitative study and a qualitative multiple case study involving 40 family physicians were analyzed. In Step 2, IAM items were analyzed and modified based on a set of guiding principles by a multi-disciplinary expert panel. Results The content validity of 16 IAM items was supported, and these items were not changed. Nine other items were modified. Three new items were added, including two that were extensions of an existing item. Conclusion A content validated version of the IAM (IAM 2011) is available for the continuing education of health professionals.

Realist review has increased in popularity as a methodology for complex intervention assessment. Our experience suggests that the process of designing a realist review requires its customization to areas under investigation. To elaborate on this idea, we first describe the logic underpinning realist review and then present critical reflections on our application experience, organized in seven areas. These are the following: (1) the challenge of identifying middle range theory; (2) addressing heterogeneity and lack of conceptual clarity; (3) the challenge of appraising the quality of complex evidence; (4) the relevance of capturing unintended outcomes; (5) understanding the process of context, mechanism, and outcome (CMO) configuring; (6) incorporating middle-range theory in the CMO configuration process; and (7) using middle range theory to advance the conceptualization of outcomes - both visible and seemingly 'hidden'. One conclusion from our experience is that the degree of heterogeneity of the evidence base will determine whether theory can drive the development of review protocols from the outset, or will follow only after an intense period of data immersion. We hope that presenting a critical reflection on customizing realist review will convey how the methodology can be tailored to the often complex and idiosyncratic features of health research, leading to innovative evidence syntheses.

Background The high volume of health information creates a need for processes and tools to select, evaluate and disseminate relevant information to health professionals in clinical practice. Objectives To introduce an index of the clinical relevance of information and to show that it is different from existing measures. Methods A conceptual model of knowledge translation was developed to explain the need for a new index, whose application was verified by an exploratory study with two (quantitative and qualitative) phases. The Clinical Relevance of Information Index (CRII) was defined employing descriptive statistical analyses of assessments performed by health professionals. The model and the CRII were applied in a primary healthcare context. Results The CRII was applied to 4574 relevance assessments of 194 evidence synopses. The assessments were performed by 41 family physicians in 2008. The CRII value of each synopsis was compared with the number of citations received by its corresponding research paper and with the level of evidence of the study, presenting weak correlation with both. Conclusion The CRII captures aspects of information not considered by other indices. It can be a parameter for information providers, institutions, editors, as well as health and information professionals targeting knowledge translation.

Introduction Collaborative mental healthcare (CMHC) has garnered worldwide interest as an effective, team-based approach to managing common mental disorders in primary care. However, questions remain about how CMHC works and why it works in some circumstances but not others. In this study, we will review the evidence on one understudied but potentially critical component of CMHC, namely the engagement of patients and families in care. Our aims are to describe the strategies used to engage people with depression or anxiety disorders and their families in CMHC and understand how these strategies work, for whom and in what circumstances. Methods and analysis We are conducting a review with systematic and realist review components. Review part 1 seeks to identify and describe the patient and family engagement strategies featured in CMHC interventions based on systematic searches and descriptive analysis of these interventions. We will use a 2012 Cochrane review of CMHC as a starting point and perform new searches in multiple databases and trial registers to retrieve more recent CMHC intervention studies. In review part 2, we will build and refine programme theories for each of these engagement strategies. Initial theory building will proceed iteratively through content expert consultations, electronic searches for theoretical literature and review team brainstorming sessions. Cluster searches will then retrieve additional data on contexts, mechanisms and outcomes associated with engagement strategies, and pairs of review authors will analyse and synthesise the evidence and adjust initial programme theories. Ethics and dissemination Our review follows a participatory approach with multiple knowledge users and persons with lived experience of mental illness. These partners will help us develop and tailor project outputs, including publications, policy briefs, training materials and guidance on how to make CMHC more patient-centred and family-centred. PROSPERO registration number CRD42015025522.

A mixed methods research (sequential explanatory design) studied the potential of mining the data from the consumers of continuing medical education (CME) programs, for the developers of CME programs. The quantitative data generated by family physicians, through applying the information assessment method to CME content, was presented to key informants from the CME planning community through a qualitative description study.The data were revealed to have many potential applications including supporting the creation of CME content, CME program planning and personal learning portfolios.

Electronic knowledge resources have the potential to rapidly provide answers to clinicians' questions. We sought to determine clinicians' reasons for searching these resources, the rate of finding relevant information, and the perceived clinical impact of the information they retrieved.We asked general internists, family physicians, and clinical nurse practitioners to complete the Information Assessment Method (IAM) survey after searching 1 of 2 electronic knowledge resources linked in the electronic health record. IAM stimulates reflection on the relevance, cognitive impact, use, and potential health outcomes of retrieved clinical information.Forty-two clinicians rated 502 searches (mean 12, range 1-48) and reported finding information 75% (n = 375) of the time. The most common reasons for searching were to address a clinical question (411, 82%) and for curiosity (75, 15%). In 68% of the rated searches (341), participants indicated they would use the retrieved information for at least 1 patient. In 31% (157) of rated searches, clinicians expected the retrieved information to benefit the patient by avoiding an unnecessary or inappropriate treatment, diagnostic procedure, or preventive intervention.Searches in electronic knowledge resources frequently yield relevant information that may benefit the patient by, for example, avoiding an inappropriate diagnostic procedure or treatment. Knowing that searches for answers to clinical questions can result in patient health benefits should intensify efforts to encourage clinicians to pursue answers to their questions.

Background: A synopsis of new clinical research highlights important aspects of one study in a brief structured format. When delivered as email alerts, synopses enable clinicians to become aware of new developments relevant for practice. Once read, a synopsis can become a known item of clinical information. In time-pressured situations, remembering a known item may facilitate information retrieval by the clinician. However, exactly how synopses first delivered as email alerts influence retrieval at some later time is not known. Objectives: We examined searches for clinical information in which a synopsis previously read as an email alert was retrieved (defined as a dyad). Our study objectives were to (1) examine whether family physicians retrieved synopses they previously read as email alerts and then to (2) explore whether family physicians purposefully retrieved these synopses. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study in which a qualitative multiple case study explored the retrieval of email alerts within a prospective longitudinal cohort of practicing family physicians. Reading of research-based synopses was tracked in two contexts: (1) push, meaning to read on email and (2) pull, meaning to read after retrieval from one electronic knowledge resource. Dyads, defined as synopses first read as email alerts and subsequently retrieved in a search of a knowledge resource, were prospectively identified. Participants were interviewed about all of their dyads. Outcomes were the total number of dyads and their type. Results: Over a period of 341 days, 194 unique synopses delivered to 41 participants resulted in 4937 synopsis readings. In all, 1205 synopses were retrieved over an average of 320 days. Of the 1205 retrieved synopses, 21 (1.7%) were dyads made by 17 family physicians. Of the 1205 retrieved synopses, 6 (0.5%) were known item type dyads. However, dyads also occurred serendipitously. Conclusion: In the single knowledge resource we studied, email alerts containing research-based synopses were rarely retrieved. Our findings help us to better understand the effect of push on pull and to improve the integration of research-based information within electronic resources for clinicians. [J Med Internet Res 2011;13(4):e101]