| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on May 23, 2006
Accepted on August 8, 2006
Affiliation of the authors: 1 Health Information Research Unit, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada ; 2 Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Division of Nephrology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada ; 3 Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Background Physicians have difficulty keeping up with new evidence from medical research.
Methods We developed the McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service (PLUS), an internet-based addition to an existing digital library, which delivered quality- and relevance-rated medical literature to physicians, matched to their clinical disciplines. We evaluated PLUS in a cluster-randomized trial of 203 participating physicians in Northern Ontario, comparing a Full-Serve version (that included alerts to new articles and a cumulative database of alerts) with a Self-Serve version (that included a passive guide to evidence-based literature). Utilization of the service was the primary trial endpoint.
Results Mean logins to the library rose by 0.77 logins/month/user (95% CI 0.43, 1.11) in the Full-Serve group compared with the Self-Serve group. The proportion of Full-Serve participants who utilized the service during each month of the study period showed a sustained increase during the intervention period, with a relative increase of 57% (95% CI 12, 123) compared with the Self-Serve group. There were no differences in these proportions during the baseline period, and following the crossover of the Self-Serve group to Full-Serve, the Self-Serve group's usage became indistinguishable from that of the Full-Serve group (relative difference 4.4 (95% CI -23.7, 43.0). Also during the intervention and crossover periods, measures of self-reported usefulness did not show a difference between the 2 groups.
Conclusion A quality- and relevance-rated online literature service increased the utilization of evidence-based information from a digital library by practicing physicians.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. M. Grad, P. Pluye, J. Mercer, B. Marlow, M.-E. Beauchamp, M. Shulha, J. Johnson-Lafleur, and S. Wood-Dauphinee Impact of Research-based Synopses Delivered as Daily E-mail: A Prospective Observational Study J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., March 1, 2008; 15(2): 240 - 245. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |