Integration of Critically Appraised Topics Into Evidence-Based Physical Therapist Practice

Crowell, Michael S.; Tragord, Bradley S.; Taylor, A; Deyle, Gail D.

doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.4265

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…RenderX nonauthoritative, community-built content to fulfill their information needs, prioritizing efficiency, familiarity, accessibility, and organization with "just the right" volume, variety, and scope to fulfill their needs [40]. The apparent dissonance between the types of resources that academic staff and researchers encourage health care professionals to use [55,56], those they report using [59,60], and those they actually use [61] informed our hypothesis-generating research questions. Through the log file analysis, we evaluated the digital information resources used by our cohort of physiotherapists in an unconfined web environment and those accessed via a federated search engine that was developed for the purposes of this study.…”

Section: Xsl • Fomentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Previous researchers have sought to affect knowledge acquisition as assessed via MCQ examinations among health care professionals with seminars [52], tutorials [53], and course modules [54]. Course materials are generally developed using the frameworks of evidence-based medicine [55,56]. However, this does not reflect real-world practice, as health care professionals [57,58]…”

Section: The Use Of Web-based Resources To Fulfill Information Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Physiotherapists’ Use of Web-Based Information Resources to Fulfill Their Information Needs During a Theoretical Examination: Randomized Crossover Trial

Doherty¹,

Joorabchi²,

Megyesi³

et al. 2020

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The widespread availability of internet-connected smart devices in the health care setting has the potential to improve the delivery of research evidence to the care pathway and fulfill health care professionals’ information needs. Objective This study aims to evaluate the frequency with which physiotherapists experience information needs, the capacity of digital information resources to fulfill these needs, and the specific types of resources they use to do so. Methods A total of 38 participants (all practicing physiotherapists; 19 females, 19 males) were randomly assigned to complete three 20-question multiple-choice questionnaire (MCQ) examinations under 3 conditions in a randomized crossover study design: assisted by a web browser, assisted by a federated search portal system, and unassisted. MCQ scores, times, and frequencies of information needs were recorded for overall examination-level and individual question-level analyses. Generalized estimating equations were used to assess differences between conditions for the primary outcomes. A log file analysis was conducted to evaluate participants’ web search and retrieval behaviors. Results Participants experienced an information need in 55.59% (845/1520) MCQs (assisted conditions only) and exhibited a mean improvement of 10% and 16% in overall examination scores for the federated search and web browser conditions, respectively, compared with the unassisted condition (P<.001). In the web browser condition, Google was the most popular resource and the only search engine used, accounting for 1273 (64%) of hits, followed by PubMed (195 hits; 10% of total). In the federated search condition, Wikipedia and PubMed were the most popular resources with 1518 (46% of total) and 1273 (39% of total) hits, respectively. Conclusions In agreement with the findings of previous research studies among medical physicians, the results of this study demonstrate that physiotherapists frequently experience information needs. This study provides new insights into the preferred digital information resources used by physiotherapists to fulfill these needs. Future research should clarify the implications of physiotherapists’ apparent high reliance on Google, whether these results reflect the authentic clinical environment, and whether fulfilling clinical information needs alters practice behaviors or improves patient outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Xsl • Fomentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: The Use Of Web-based Resources To Fulfill Information Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physiotherapists’ Use of Web-Based Information Resources to Fulfill Their Information Needs During a Theoretical Examination: Randomized Crossover Trial

Doherty¹,

Joorabchi²,

Megyesi³

et al. 2020

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Readers can also find an example of search strategy and selection criteria for non‐specific low back pain in Balagué et al 23 The search strategy is provided with keywords and equations combining these keywords, along with a description of the main studies eventually found and critically appraised. Similarly, one can refer to Oliveira et al 20 and Ikemoto et al 22 to see typical presentations of synthesis results, or any above‐cited case‐based critical reviews 6,7,9‐11 for focused presentations of outputs of reviews.…”

Section: Shared Decision Evidence Synthesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The answer to the clinical question is applied to the patient 5 and allows for a shared decision making. The approach has been formalized by structuring some case‐based critical reviews as critically appraised topics (CATs) 6‐8 or best‐evidence topic (BET) reviews 9‐11 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Covering patient’s perspective in case‐based critical review articles to improve shared decision making in complex cases

Salmi

Côté

Cedraschi³

2020

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The patient has always been at the centre of the evidence‐based medicine model. Case‐based critical reviews, such as best‐evidence topics, however, are incomplete reflections of the evidence‐based medicine philosophy, because they fail to consider the patient's perspective. We propose a new framework, called the ‘Shared Decision Evidence Summary’ (ShaDES), where the patient's perspective on available treatment options is explicitly included. Methods Our framework is grounded in the critical appraisal of a clinical scenario, and the development of a clinical question, including patient characteristics, compared options and outcomes to be improved. Answers to the clinical question are informed by the literature, the evaluation of its quality and its potential usefulness to the clinical scenario. Finally, the evidence synthesis is presented to the patient to facilitate the formulation of an evidence‐informed decision about the treatment options. Key results Using three similar but contrasted clinical scenarios of patients with low back pain, we illustrate how considering the patient's preferences on the proposed treatment options impact the bottom line, a synthetic formulation of the answer to the focused question. ShaDES includes clinical and psychosocial components, transformed in a searchable question, with a full search strategy. Conclusions ShaDES is a practical framework that may facilitate clinical decisions adapted to psychological, social and other relevant non‐clinical characteristics of patients.

show abstract

“…CATs are one type of quality rapid review that has emerged across several disciplines (Bowden, Harrison, & Loring, 2014;Capilouto, 2007;Crowell, Tragord, Taylor, & Deyle, 2012;Dawes, 2005;McKeon & McKeon, 2014;Muhlenhaupt, 2008;O'Brien, 2010;Rutter & Shortreed, 2012). A CAT is a structured and brief summary of best available evidence, typically derived from 3 to 5 critically appraised papers that are organized around a clinical question.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Letting the CAT out of the bag: Contribution of critically appraised topics to evidence-based practice

White

Raghavendra

McAllister

2017

Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Locating the best available research, critically appraising it and synthesizing the findings with evidence from practice and the wishes of the service user and/or their advocate(s) is central to providing high-quality services to people with communication impairments. Determining whether research evidence is high quality, recent, and relevant is a particular challenge for practitioners. Knowledge translation strategies such as providing critical appraisals of research and advice on how to apply the findings provide useful support to the decision-making process. There are a number of formats that provide critical appraisals of research, the most familiar being systematic reviews, critically appraised papers, and rapid reviews. A critically appraised topic (CAT) is one form of rapid review that can be particularly useful for informing practice in a rich and nuanced manner. We will discuss the features of CATs along with similarities and differences to systematic reviews, critically appraised papers, and other types of rapid reviews. Additionally, we will provide guidance on how to conduct a CAT, present the information, and use it to support high-quality communication assessment and intervention practice.

show abstract

Integration of Critically Appraised Topics Into Evidence-Based Physical Therapist Practice

Cited by 10 publications

References 24 publications

Physiotherapists’ Use of Web-Based Information Resources to Fulfill Their Information Needs During a Theoretical Examination: Randomized Crossover Trial

Physiotherapists’ Use of Web-Based Information Resources to Fulfill Their Information Needs During a Theoretical Examination: Randomized Crossover Trial

Covering patient’s perspective in case‐based critical review articles to improve shared decision making in complex cases

Letting the CAT out of the bag: Contribution of critically appraised topics to evidence-based practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About