Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science (한국문헌정보학회지)

Korean Society For Library And Information Science (한국문헌정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Qualitative Study of Physicians' Use of Clinical Information Resources and Barriers

임상의사의 진료목적 정보원 이용과 장애요인에 관한 질적 연구

  • 김순 (이화여자대학교 이화사회과학원) ;
  • 정은경 (이화여자대학교 문헌정보학전공)
  • Received : 2016.10.24
  • Accepted : 2016.11.11
  • Published : 2016.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

We analyzed the characteristics of the physicians preferred information sources and barriers through in-depth interviews. Information searches for patient treatment were subdivided into deciding patient treatment methods, understanding the latest treatment trends, and preparing presentation materials for conferences. The variables that affected the search behaviors were identified as being background knowledge on the topic, clinical experience, job title, search skills, user training, and familiarity with the library homepage. PubMed was the most preferred choice because of users' familiarity, reliability, and the vastness of information; Google was also used frequently for easy access and fast search result. The accuracy and the recentness of information were the most significant criteria. Easy interface and convenient access were also considered important due to physicians' time constraints. Searching obstacles were divided into difficulty of searching system, unfamiliar term, too vast resources, difficulty to get fulltext articles and complex advanced search features. The results of this study can be utilized as a basis for improving information service of library and curriculum development for physicians.

본 논문은 임상의사가 선호하는 임상정보원의 특성과 정보검색 시 장애요인을 심층인터뷰를 통해 분석하였다. 환자 진료를 위한 정보검색은 환자치료방법 결정, 최신 경향 파악, 내부 컨퍼런스 발표자료 준비 등으로 구분되었으며, 이러한 검색행위에 영향을 미치는 변인으로는 주제 배경지식, 진료 경험, 직급, 검색 능력, DB 이용교육, 도서관 홈페이지 친숙도 등으로 나타났다. 온라인 임상정보원은 익숙하고 신뢰성이 높고 방대한 정보의 양 때문에 PubMed가 가장 선호되었으며, 속도가 빠르고 쓰기 쉬운 구글도 많이 사용되었다. 정보내용의 정확성과 최신성이 정보원 선정에 있어 가장 중요한 기준으로 적용되었으며, 시간이 많이 부족한 관계로 검색방법의 용이성, 정보에 대한 접근 편이성도 중요하게 여겨지고 있었다. 사용하기 불편한 검색시스템, 생소한 주제나 용어의 검색 어려움, 너무나 방대한 자료, 원문 접근의 어려움, 복잡한 고급검색 기능 등이 장애요인으로 도출되었다. 본 연구결과는 도서관 서비스 개선이나 임상의사의 정보검색 교육과정을 개선하는데 기초자료로 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. 권혜진, 정동열. 2011. 기자직의 웹 정보탐색행위 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 45(2): 325-344. (Kwon, Hye-Jin and Jeong, Dong-Youl. 2011. "A Study on News Reporters' Information SeekingBehavior on the Web." Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science,45(2): 325-344.) https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2011.45.2.325
  2. 김나원, 박지홍. 2009. 의사들의 의료정보추구행태에 관한 탐구. 정보관리학회지, 26(3): 435-449. (Kim, Na-Won and Park, Ji-Hong. 2009. "Exploring Medical Doctors' Medical InformationSeeking Behaviors." Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 26(3):435-449.) https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2009.26.3.435
  3. 박진영. 2012. 근거중심의학(EBM) 정보서비스 도입을 위한 연구: 임상 전공의의 정보이용행태와 EBM에 대한 인식을 바탕으로. 석사학위논문, 명지대학교 대학원 문헌정보학과. (Park, Jin Young. 2012. A Study on Introducing of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) InformationServices: Based on the Clinical residents' Information Seeking Behavior and the Perceptionof EBM. M.A. thesis, Department of Library & Information Science, Graduate School, MyongjiUniversity, Korea.)
  4. 조화순, 이영철, 오동근. 2010. 의학도서관 이용자의 전자저널 이용행태 분석. 의학정보관리, 37(1-2): 1-13. (Cho, Hwa-Sun, Lee, Young-Chul and Oh, Dong-Geun. 2010. "Analysis of Medical LibraryUsers' Utilization Behavior of the Electronic Journals." Journal of Korean Medical Science,37(1-2): 1-13.)
  5. 홍기선. 2008. 의사들의 정보요구 및 이용행태에 관한 연구. 한국도서관․정보학회지, 39(1): 33-50. (Hong, Ki-Sun. 2008. "A Study on Information Need and Use Behavior of Doctors." Journalof Korean Library and Information Science Society, 39(1): 33-50.)
  6. Cook, D. A. et al. 2013. "Barriers and Decisions When Answering Clinical Questions at the Point of Care: A Grounded Theory Study." JAMA Internal Medicine, 173(21): 1962-1969. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.10103
  7. Davidoff, F. and Miglus, J. 2011. "Delivering Clinical Evidence Where it's Needed: Building an Information System Worthy of the Profession." JAMA, 305(18): 1906-1907. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.619
  8. Davies, K. 2007. "The Information-Seeking Behaviour of Doctors: A Review of the Evidence." Health Information & Libraries Journal, 24(2): 78-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00713.x
  9. Davies, K. 2011. "Information Needs and Barriers to Accessing Electronic Information: Hospital-Based Physicians Compared to Primary Care Physicians." Journal of Hospital Librarianship, 11(3): 249-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/15323269.2011.587103
  10. Dawes, M. and Sampson, U. 2003. "Knowledge Management in Clinical Practice: a Systematic Review of Information Seeking Behavior in Physicians." International Journal of Medical Informatics, 71(1): 9-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1386-5056(03)00023-6
  11. De Groote, S. L., Shultz, M. and Doranski, M. 2005. "Online Journals' Impact on the Citation Patterns of Medical Faculty." Journal of the Medical Library Association, 93(2): 223-228.
  12. Del Fiol, G., Workman, T. E. and Gorman, P. N. 2014. "Clinical Questions Raised by Physicians at the Point of Care: A Systematic Review." JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(5): 710-718. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.368
  13. Gorman, P. N. 1995. "Information Needs of Physicians." Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 46(10): 729-736. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199512)46:10<729::AID-ASI3>3.0.CO;2-2
  14. Hughes, B., Wareham, J. and Joshi, I. 2010. "Doctors' Online Information Needs, Cognitive Search Strategies, and Judgments of Information Quality and Cognitive authority: How Predictive Judgments Introduce Bias into Cognitive Search Models." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(3): 433-452.
  15. Krippendorff, K. 1980. Content Analysis. An Introduction to its Methodology. London: Sage Publications.
  16. Landry, C. 2006. "Work Roles, Tasks, and the Information Behavior of Dentists." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(14): 1896-1908. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20385
  17. Leckie, G. J., Pettigrew, K. E. and Sylvain, C. 1996. "Modeling the Information Seeking of Professionals: A General Model Derived from Research on Engineers, Health Care Professionals and Lawyers." Library Quarterly, 66(2): 161-193. https://doi.org/10.1086/602864
  18. McKibbon, K. A. and Fridsma, D. B. 2006. "Effectiveness of Physician-Selected Electronic Information Resources for Answering Primary Care Physicians' Information Needs." Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA, 13(6): 653-659. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2087
  19. Park, T. 1993. "The Nature of Relevance in Information Retrieval: An Empirical Study." Library Quarterly, 63: 318-351. https://doi.org/10.1086/602592
  20. Rieh, S. Y. 2002. "Judgment of Information Quality and Cognitive Authority in the Web." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2): 145-161. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10017
  21. Saracevic, T. et al. 1988. "A Study of Information Seeking and Retrieving: I. Background and Methodology." Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 39(3): 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198805)39:3<161::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-0
  22. Tang, R. and Solomon, P. 2001. "Use of Relevance Criteria Across Stages of Document Evaluation: On the Complementarity of Experimental and Naturalistic Studies." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(8): 676-685. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.1116