Content analysis of clinical questions from Australian general practice which are prioritised for answering: identifying common question types and perceived knowledge gaps

Danielle Marie Muscat, Pinika Patel, Sharon Reid, Tammy Hoffmann, Loai Albarqouni, Lyndal Trevena

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Perceived knowledge gaps in general practice are not well documented but must be understood to ensure relevant and timely evidence for busy general practitioners (GPs) which reflects their diverse and changing needs. The aim of this study was to classify the types of questions submitted by Australian GPs to an evidence-based practice information service using established and inductive coding systems. We analysed 126 clinical questions submitted by 53 Australian GPs over a 1.5-year period. Questions were coded using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2 PLUS) and Ely and colleagues' generic questions taxonomy by two independent coders. Inductive qualitative content analysis was also used to identify perceived knowledge gaps. Treatment (71%), diagnosis (15%) and epidemiology (9%) were the most common categories of questions. Using the ICPC-2 classification, questions were most commonly coded to the endocrine/metabolic and nutritional chapter heading, followed by general and unspecified, digestive and musculoskeletal. Seventy per cent of all questions related to the need to stay up-to-date with the evidence, or be informed about new tests or treatments (including complementary and alternative therapies). These findings suggest that current guideline formats for common clinical problems may not meet the knowledge demands of GPs and there is gap in access to evidence updates on new tests, treatments and complementary and alternative therapies. Better systems for 'pulling' real-time questions from GPs could better inform the 'push' of more relevant and timely evidence for use in the clinical encounter.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages7
JournalBMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 24 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

General Practice
General Practitioners
Complementary Therapies
Information Services
Evidence-Based Practice
Computer Systems
Primary Health Care
Epidemiology
Therapeutics
Guidelines

Cite this

@article{5520c22b77264fe5baf754bd988e5394,
title = "Content analysis of clinical questions from Australian general practice which are prioritised for answering: identifying common question types and perceived knowledge gaps",
abstract = "Perceived knowledge gaps in general practice are not well documented but must be understood to ensure relevant and timely evidence for busy general practitioners (GPs) which reflects their diverse and changing needs. The aim of this study was to classify the types of questions submitted by Australian GPs to an evidence-based practice information service using established and inductive coding systems. We analysed 126 clinical questions submitted by 53 Australian GPs over a 1.5-year period. Questions were coded using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2 PLUS) and Ely and colleagues' generic questions taxonomy by two independent coders. Inductive qualitative content analysis was also used to identify perceived knowledge gaps. Treatment (71{\%}), diagnosis (15{\%}) and epidemiology (9{\%}) were the most common categories of questions. Using the ICPC-2 classification, questions were most commonly coded to the endocrine/metabolic and nutritional chapter heading, followed by general and unspecified, digestive and musculoskeletal. Seventy per cent of all questions related to the need to stay up-to-date with the evidence, or be informed about new tests or treatments (including complementary and alternative therapies). These findings suggest that current guideline formats for common clinical problems may not meet the knowledge demands of GPs and there is gap in access to evidence updates on new tests, treatments and complementary and alternative therapies. Better systems for 'pulling' real-time questions from GPs could better inform the 'push' of more relevant and timely evidence for use in the clinical encounter.",
author = "Muscat, {Danielle Marie} and Pinika Patel and Sharon Reid and Tammy Hoffmann and Loai Albarqouni and Lyndal Trevena",
note = "{\circledC} Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "24",
doi = "10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111210",
language = "English",
journal = "BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine",
issn = "1356-5524",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

}

Content analysis of clinical questions from Australian general practice which are prioritised for answering : identifying common question types and perceived knowledge gaps. / Muscat, Danielle Marie; Patel, Pinika; Reid, Sharon; Hoffmann, Tammy; Albarqouni, Loai; Trevena, Lyndal.

In: BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 24.06.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Content analysis of clinical questions from Australian general practice which are prioritised for answering

T2 - identifying common question types and perceived knowledge gaps

AU - Muscat, Danielle Marie

AU - Patel, Pinika

AU - Reid, Sharon

AU - Hoffmann, Tammy

AU - Albarqouni, Loai

AU - Trevena, Lyndal

N1 - © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

PY - 2019/6/24

Y1 - 2019/6/24

N2 - Perceived knowledge gaps in general practice are not well documented but must be understood to ensure relevant and timely evidence for busy general practitioners (GPs) which reflects their diverse and changing needs. The aim of this study was to classify the types of questions submitted by Australian GPs to an evidence-based practice information service using established and inductive coding systems. We analysed 126 clinical questions submitted by 53 Australian GPs over a 1.5-year period. Questions were coded using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2 PLUS) and Ely and colleagues' generic questions taxonomy by two independent coders. Inductive qualitative content analysis was also used to identify perceived knowledge gaps. Treatment (71%), diagnosis (15%) and epidemiology (9%) were the most common categories of questions. Using the ICPC-2 classification, questions were most commonly coded to the endocrine/metabolic and nutritional chapter heading, followed by general and unspecified, digestive and musculoskeletal. Seventy per cent of all questions related to the need to stay up-to-date with the evidence, or be informed about new tests or treatments (including complementary and alternative therapies). These findings suggest that current guideline formats for common clinical problems may not meet the knowledge demands of GPs and there is gap in access to evidence updates on new tests, treatments and complementary and alternative therapies. Better systems for 'pulling' real-time questions from GPs could better inform the 'push' of more relevant and timely evidence for use in the clinical encounter.

AB - Perceived knowledge gaps in general practice are not well documented but must be understood to ensure relevant and timely evidence for busy general practitioners (GPs) which reflects their diverse and changing needs. The aim of this study was to classify the types of questions submitted by Australian GPs to an evidence-based practice information service using established and inductive coding systems. We analysed 126 clinical questions submitted by 53 Australian GPs over a 1.5-year period. Questions were coded using the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2 PLUS) and Ely and colleagues' generic questions taxonomy by two independent coders. Inductive qualitative content analysis was also used to identify perceived knowledge gaps. Treatment (71%), diagnosis (15%) and epidemiology (9%) were the most common categories of questions. Using the ICPC-2 classification, questions were most commonly coded to the endocrine/metabolic and nutritional chapter heading, followed by general and unspecified, digestive and musculoskeletal. Seventy per cent of all questions related to the need to stay up-to-date with the evidence, or be informed about new tests or treatments (including complementary and alternative therapies). These findings suggest that current guideline formats for common clinical problems may not meet the knowledge demands of GPs and there is gap in access to evidence updates on new tests, treatments and complementary and alternative therapies. Better systems for 'pulling' real-time questions from GPs could better inform the 'push' of more relevant and timely evidence for use in the clinical encounter.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068175270&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111210

DO - 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111210

M3 - Article

JO - BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

JF - BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

SN - 1356-5524

ER -