Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective To identify features of clinical decision support systems critical for improving clinical practice. Design Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Literature searches via Medline, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to 2003; and searches of reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews. Study selection Studies had to evaluate the ability of decision support systems to improve clinical practice. Data extraction Studies were assessed for statistically and clinically significant improvement in clinical practice and for the presence of 15 decision support system features whose importance had been repeatedly suggested in the literature. Results Seventy studies were included. Decision support systems significantly improved clinical practice in 68% of trials. Univariate analyses revealed that, for five of the system features, interventions possessing the feature were significantly more likely to improve clinical practice than interventions lacking the feature. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified four features as independent predictors of improved clinical practice: automatic provision of decision support as part of clinician workflow (P < 0.00001), provision of recommendations rather than just assessments (P = 0.0187), provision of decision support at the time and location of decision making (P = 0.0263), and computer based decision support (P = 0.0294). Of 32 systems possessing all four features, 30 (94%) significantly improved clinical practice. Furthermore, direct experimental justification was found for providing periodic performance feedback, sharing recommendations with patients, and requesting documentation of reasons for not following recommendations. Conclusions Several features were closely correlated with decision support systems' ability to improve patient care significantly. Clinicians and other stakeholders should implement clinical decision support systems that incorporate these features whenever feasible and appropriate.

Abstract Objective To describe where papers come from in a systematic review of complex evidence. Method Audit of how the 495 primary sources for the review were originally identified. Results Only 30% of sources were obtained from the protocol defined at the outset of the study (that is, from the database and hand searches). Fifty one per cent were identified by “snowballing” (such as pursuing references of references), and 24% by personal knowledge or personal contacts. Conclusion Systematic reviews of complex evidence cannot rely solely on protocol-driven search strategies.

Research in the USA to measure whether patients completed diaries according to the protocol for patients with chronic pain. [(BNI unique abstract)]

Abstract Objective To examine users' attitudes to implementation of an electronic medical record system in Kaiser Permanente Hawaii. Design Qualitative study based on semistructured interviews. Setting Four primary healthcare teams in four clinics, and four specialty departments in one hospital, on Oahu, Hawaii. Shortly before the interviews, Kaiser Permanente stopped implementation of the initial system in favour of a competing one. Participants Twenty six senior clinicians, managers, and project team members. Results Seven key findings emerged: users perceived the decision to adopt the electronic medical record system as flawed; software design problems increased resistance; the system reduced doctors' productivity, especially during initial implementation, which fuelled resistance; the system required clarification of clinical roles and responsibilities, which was traumatic for some individuals; a cooperative culture created trade-offs at varying points in the implementation; no single leadership style was optimal—a participatory, consensus-building style may lead to more effective adoption decisions, whereas decisive leadership could help resolve barriers and resistance during implementation; the process fostered a counter climate of conflict, which was resolved by withdrawal of the initial system. Conclusions Implementation involved several critical components, including perceptions of the system selection, early testing, adaptation of the system to the larger organisation, and adaptation of the organisation to the new electronic environment. Throughout, organisational factors such as leadership, culture, and professional ideals played complex roles, each facilitating and hindering implementation at various points. A transient climate of conflict was associated with adoption of the system.

Objective To explore how men and women with cancer talk about using the internet. Design Qualitative study using semistructured interviews collected by maximum variation sampling. Setting Respondents recruited throughout the United Kingdom during 2001-2. Participants 175 men and women aged 19-83 years, with one of five cancers (prostate, testicular, breast, cervical, or bowel) diagnosed since 1992 and selected to include different stages of treatment and follow up. Results Internet use, either directly or via friend or family, was widespread and reported by patients at all stages of cancer care, from early investigations to follow up after treatment. Patients used the internet to find second opinions, seek support and experiential information from other patients, interpret symptoms, seek information about tests and treatments, help interpret consultations, identify questions for doctors, make anonymous private inquiries, and raise awareness of the cancer. Patients also used it to check their doctors' advice covertly and to develop an expertise in their cancer. This expertise, reflecting familiarity with computer technology and medical terms, enabled patients to present a new type of “social fitness.” Conclusion Cancer patients used the internet for a wide range of information and support needs, many of which are unlikely to be met through conventional health care. Serious illness often undermines people's self image as a competent member of society. Cancer patients may use the internet to acquire expertise to display competence in the face of serious illness.

Abstract Objectives: To explore why cancer patients do not want or seek information about their condition beyond that volunteered by their physicians at times during their illness. Design: Qualitative study based on in-depth interviews. Setting: Outpatient oncology clinics at a London cancer centre. Participants: 17 patients with cancer diagnosed in previous 6 months. Main outcome measures: Analysis of patients' narratives to identify key themes and categories. Results: While all patients wanted basic information on diagnosis and treatment, not all wanted further information at all stages of their illness. Three overarching attitudes to their management of cancer limited patients' deon with life as normal and could be maintained through silence and avoiding information, especially too detailed or “unsafe” information. Charity to fellow patients, especially those seen as more needy than themselves, was expressed in the recognition that scarce resources—including information and explanations—had to be shared and meant that limited information was accepted as inevitable. Conclusions: Cancer patients' attitudes to cancer and their strategies for coping with their illness can constrain their wish for information and their efforts to obtain it. In developing recommendations, the government's cancer information strategy should attend to variations in patients' desires for information and the reasons for them.

PurposeThis systematic literature review aims to elaborate the research progress of information practices to help other researchers attain a more holistic and comprehensive understanding of the field.Design/methodology/approachFollowing a systematic review protocol, 123 research articles from nine academic databases were included in the analysis.FindingsFour separate results can be outlined. First, practice theory, social constructionist theory and activity theory are often used as the theoretical basis for the study of information practices. Second, people will engage in specific information practice activities in different external and internal contexts. The external contexts include social and needs contexts. The internal contexts include information source horizons, user's affection and user's cognition. Third, the existing information practice models can be divided into static and dynamic types. These models mainly reflected activities and influencing factors of information practices. Fourth, qualitative methods were the most used in information practice research.Research limitations/implicationsThe field of information practices is a vast, expanding research field. This research will focus only on a specific section, namely concepts, activities, contexts and models. Researchers could contribute to exploring the concepts, components and mechanisms of information practices by combining theories from various disciplines, such as sociology and behavioral science.Originality/valueThis is the first study to reveal the general picture of information practices. It also elaborates the characteristics of people's information practices and shows the potential development direction for future research.

Abstract Objectives: To characterise the information needs of family doctors by collecting the questions they asked about patient care during consultations and to classify these in ways that would be useful to developers of knowledge bases. Design: Observational study in which investigators visited doctors for two half days and collected their questions. Taxonomies were developed to characterise the clinical topic and generic type of information sought for each question. Setting: Eastern Iowa. Participants: Random sample of 103 family doctors. Main outcome measures: Number of questions posed, pursued, and answered; topic and generic type of information sought for each question; time spent pursuing answers; information resources used. Results: Participants asked a total of 1101 questions. Questions about drug prescribing, obstetrics and gynaecology, and adult infectious disease were most common and comprised 36% of all questions. The taxonomy of generic questions included 69 categories; the three most common types, comprising 24% of all questions, were “What is the cause of symptom X?” “What is the dose of drug X?” and “How should I manage disease or finding X?” Answers to most questions (702, 64%) were not immediately pursued, but, of those pursued, most (318, 80%) were answered Doctors spent an average of less than 2 minutes pursuing an answer, and they used readily available print and human resources Only two questions led to a formal literature search. Conclusions: Family doctors in this study did not pursue answers to most of their questions. Questions about patient care can be organised into a limited number of generic types, which could help guide the efforts of knowledge base developers. Key messages Questions that doctors have about the care of their patients could help guide the content of medical information sources and medical training In this study of US family doctors, participants frequently had questions about patient care but did not pursue answers to most questions (64%) On average, participants spent less than 2 minutes seeking an answer to a question The most common resources used to answer questions included textbooks and colleagues; formal literature searches were rarely performed The most common generic questions were “What is the cause of symptom X?” “What is the dose of drug X?” and “How should I manage disease or finding X?”