Search

BackgroundInformation overload is affecting modern society now more than ever because of the wide and increasing distribution of digital technologies. Social media, emails, and online communications among others infuse a sense of urgency as information must be read, produced, and exchanged almost instantaneously. Emergency medicine is a medical specialty that is particularly affected by information overload with consequences on patient care that are difficult to quantify and address. Understanding the current causes of medical information overload, their impact on patient care, and strategies to handle the inflow of constant information is crucial to alleviating stress and anxiety that is already crippling the profession. ObjectiveThis study aims to identify and evaluate the main causes and sources of medical information overload, as experienced by emergency medicine physicians in selected National Health Service (NHS) trusts in the United Kingdom. MethodsThis study used a quantitative, survey-based data collection approach including close- and open-ended questions. A web-based survey was distributed to emergency physicians to assess the impact of medical information overload on their jobs. In total, 101 valid responses were collected from 4 NHS trusts in north England. Descriptive statistics, principal component analysis, independent sample two-tailed t tests, and one-way between-group analysis of variance with post hoc tests were performed on the data. Open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key topics. ResultsThe vast majority of respondents agreed that information overload is a serious issue in emergency medicine, and it increases with time. The always available culture (mean 5.40, SD 1.56), email handling (mean 4.86, SD 1.80), and multidisciplinary communications (mean 4.51, SD 1.61) are the 3 main reasons leading to information overload. Due to this, emergency physicians experience guideline fatigue, stress and tension, longer working hours, and impaired decision making, among other issues. Aspects of information overload are also reported to have different impacts on physicians depending on demographic factors such as age, years spent in emergency medicine, and level of employment. ConclusionsThere is a serious concern regarding information overload in emergency medicine. Participants identified a considerable number of daily causes affecting their job, particularly the traditional culture of emergency departments being always available on the ward, exacerbated by email and other forms of communication necessary to maintain optimal, evidence-based practice standards. However, not all information is unwelcome, as physicians also need to stay updated with the latest guidelines on conditions and treatment, and communicate with larger medical teams to provide quality care.

This paper reports the results of a primary data collection exercise conducted with postgraduate students enrolled at a large Russell Group university in the UK. The aim of this study was to gain insights of students' experience of a jointly-taught, distance learning, part-time postgraduate programme. A mixed-methods approach involving an online survey and semi-structured interviews was adopted. The results show that students concentrated their perceptions on three main areas: the academic content of the programme, seen as current, interesting and relevant to their professional lives; delivery processes, including the advantages of the flexibility and tailored approach and the disadvantages of being exposed to different teaching styles and lack of face to face interaction; the administrative and practical aspects, accounting for the majority of complaints due to the discrepancies across the two schools responsible for the delivery of the programme. Differences in experience emerged depending on gender and year of enrolment.

This study contributes to an understanding of the role of experience in the evaluation phase of the information search process. A questionnaire-based survey collected data from 1st and 3rd-year undergraduate students regarding the factors that influence their judgment of the trustworthiness of online health information. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted. First-year students identified four factors: ease of use, content, recommendation and brand. Third-year students identified seven factors, in order of importance: content, credibility, recommendation, ease of use, usefulness, style and brand. They also were much clearer about their evaluation processes than 1st-year students; for 3rd-year students, the factor structure was clearer, and items generally loaded onto the expected factors. The significance of these findings is discussed and recommendations for practice and further research are offered.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to address the unmet information needs of Malawian informal carers. We report on a three-year project which we co-created with informal carers, medical doctors and NGOs with the view to disseminate health advisory messages. Design/methodology/approach: This study was developed on the principles of co-production. The impact of our health advisory messaging approach was assessed through observations and questionnaire-based surveys for quality, clarity and usefulness. Findings: The messages were disseminated beyond the local support groups and reached a much wider community via word of mouth. The messages also led to short and medium term benefits for informal carers and their loved ones. Originality/value: Our findings highlight the importance of understanding the contextual conditions of informal caring and that of co-producing interventions with the people these aim to benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Globally, populations are aging, generating concerns about the sustainability of health and social care provision. In terms of the public provision of social care in particular, unpaid carers provide much of the support to people with disabilities and older people. In addition, there is an increased onus in many countries on digital transformation projects, in the hope that the digitalization of services can create efficiencies and savings in both costs and care labor. In England, the focus of this paper, the shift to digital services is also framed as a means to enhance choice and control for older unpaid carers, while being part of a broader offering that includes nondigital alternatives and support to mitigate digital exclusion. Objective: This study examines the impact of digitalization on older, unpaid carers—a group more likely to be both expected to engage digitally with services and at risk of digital exclusion—in England, focusing on their lived experiences in terms of caring and access to social care. Methods: We used a constructionist approach to thematic analysis, where data from 48 older unpaid carers collected through focus groups were analyzed using thematic analysis, resulting in 4 prevailing themes. Results: Our findings indicated that while unpaid carers largely acknowledge the benefits of digitalization, they also highlight several points of failure, whereby engagement with digital spaces is experienced as coercive and exacerbates feelings of exclusion. These are further worsened by government failures to address issues of connectivity, imposing additional financial burdens and complicating tasks such as benefit applications. Conclusions: In this study, we have highlighted the need for greater involvement in shaping both policy and technological solutions, which in turn will be more inclusive and aligned to the aspirations and circumstances of older carers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Uneven vaccination and less resilient health care systems mean hospitals in LMICs are at risk of being overwhelmed during periods of increased COVID-19 infection. Risk-scores proposed for rapid triage of need for admission from the emergency department (ED) have been developed in higher-income settings during initial waves of the pandemic. Methods: Routinely collected data for public hospitals in the Western Cape, South Africa from the 27th August 2020 to 11th March 2022 were used to derive a cohort of 446,084 ED patients with suspected COVID-19. The primary outcome was death or ICU admission at 30 days. The cohort was divided into derivation and Omicron variant validation sets. We developed the LMIC-PRIEST score based on the coefficients from multivariable analysis in the derivation cohort and existing triage practices. We externally validated accuracy in the Omicron period and a UK cohort. Results: We analysed 305,564 derivation, 140,520 Omicron and 12,610 UK validation cases. Over 100 events per predictor parameter were modelled. Multivariable analyses identified eight predictor variables retained across models. We used these findings and clinical judgement to develop a score based on South African Triage Early Warning Scores and also included age, sex, oxygen saturation, inspired oxygen, diabetes and heart disease. The LMIC-PRIEST score achieved C-statistics: 0.82 (95% CI: 0.82 to 0.83) development cohort; 0.79 (95% CI: 0.78 to 0.80) Omicron cohort; and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.79 to 0.80) UK cohort. Differences in prevalence of outcomes led to imperfect calibration in external validation. However, use of the score at thresholds of three or less would allow identification of very low-risk patients (NPV ≥0.99) who could be rapidly discharged using information collected at initial assessment. Conclusion: The LMIC-PRIEST score shows good discrimination and high sensitivity at lower thresholds and can be used to rapidly identify low-risk patients in LMIC ED settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The scholarly publication landscape continues to grow in complexity, presenting researchers with ever-increasing dilemmas regarding journal choice. However, research into the decision-making processes associated with journal choice is limited. This article contributes by reporting on an international survey of researchers in various disciplines and with varying levels of experience. The study examines the extent to which various journal characteristics affect journal selection, perceptions of the extent to which university and national research policies impact on their journal choice, and the influence of academics' familiarity, confidence and objectives on journal choice. The most important factors influencing journal choice were as follows: reliability of reviewing, usefulness of reviewers' feedback, the reputation of the journal and confidence that their article is in scope for the journal. Publishing productivity, publishing experience, researcher role and discipline had little impact on the ranking of journal choice factors, suggesting that the research community is homogeneous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]