Skip to main content
PMC home page
Bulletin of the Medical Library Association logoLink to Bulletin of the Medical Library Association
. 1994 Oct;82(4):382–389.

Use of a multi-application computer workstation in a clinical setting.

W Hersh 1, D Hickam 1
PMCID: PMC225961  PMID: 7841907

Abstract

The goal of this study was to assess the usage frequency, user satisfaction, and quality of literature searchers for a multi-application computer workstation in a university-based general medicine clinic. A computer with medical literature searching, textbook searching, and a decision-support program was deployed in the workroom of the clinic and made available for routine use. Data were collected for ten months. More than three quarters of the study participants used the computer, with use increasing by level of medical training. Despite physicians' known preferences for nonjournal sources of information, literature searching was the application used most frequently, followed by textbooks and decision support. The literature searches were replicated by experienced clinician and librarian searchers using first full MEDLINE and then text-word-only searching, to compare the quantities of relevant references retrieved. Novice searchers retrieved a larger number of relevant references than did the experienced searchers, but they also retrieved more nonrelevant references. For both groups of experienced searchers, the full MEDLINE feature set conferred little benefit over searching with only text words. These searching results call into question the value of traditional searching methods for both novice and experienced physicians.

Full text

PDF
382

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Ben-Shir R. Fast Inter Library Loans and Statistics, enhanced version 2.0. Med Ref Serv Q. 1986 Spring;5(1):17–39. doi: 10.1300/j115v05n01_02. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Broering N. C., Bagdoyan H. E. The impact of IAIMS at Georgetown: strategies and outcomes. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1992 Jul;80(3):263–275. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cimino J. J., Aguirre A., Johnson S. B., Peng P. Generic queries for meeting clinical information needs. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1993 Apr;81(2):195–206. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Collen M. F., Flagle C. D. Full-text medical literature retrieval by computer. A pilot test. JAMA. 1985 Nov 15;254(19):2768–2774. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Covell D. G., Uman G. C., Manning P. R. Information needs in office practice: are they being met? Ann Intern Med. 1985 Oct;103(4):596–599. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-103-4-596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dalrymple P. W. CD-ROM MEDLINE use and users: information transfer in the clinical setting. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1990 Jul;78(3):224–232. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ely J. W., Burch R. J., Vinson D. C. The information needs of family physicians: case-specific clinical questions. J Fam Pract. 1992 Sep;35(3):265–269. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Funk M. E., Reid C. A. Indexing consistency in MEDLINE. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1983 Apr;71(2):176–183. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Haynes R. B., McKibbon K. A., Walker C. J., Ryan N., Fitzgerald D., Ramsden M. F. Online access to MEDLINE in clinical settings. A study of use and usefulness. Ann Intern Med. 1990 Jan 1;112(1):78–84. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-112-1-78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Haynes R. B., Ramsden M. F., McKibbon K. A., Walker C. J. Online access to MEDLINE in clinical settings: impact of user fees. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1991 Oct;79(4):377–381. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hersh W. R., Hickam D. H. A comparison of retrieval effectiveness for three methods of indexing medical literature. Am J Med Sci. 1992 May;303(5):292–300. doi: 10.1097/00000441-199205000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hersh W. R., Hickam D. H. A comparison of two methods for indexing and retrieval from a full-text medical database. Med Decis Making. 1993 Jul-Sep;13(3):220–226. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9301300308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kirpalani H., Schmidt B., McKibbon K. A., Haynes R. B., Sinclair J. C. Searching MEDLINE for randomized clinical trials involving care of the newborn. Pediatrics. 1989 Apr;83(4):543–546. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Ludwig L., Mixter J. K., Emanuele M. A. User attitudes toward end-user literature searching. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1988 Jan;76(1):7–13. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Markert R. J., Parisi A. J., Barnes H. V., Cohen S., Goldenberg K., Mieczkowski L. E., Dunn M., Siervogel R. M. Medical student, resident, and faculty use of a computerized literature searching system. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1989 Apr;77(2):133–138. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. McKibbon K. A., Haynes R. B., Dilks C. J., Ramsden M. F., Ryan N. C., Baker L., Flemming T., Fitzgerald D. How good are clinical MEDLINE searches? A comparative study of clinical end-user and librarian searches. Comput Biomed Res. 1990 Dec;23(6):583–593. doi: 10.1016/0010-4809(90)90042-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Miller R. A., Pople H. E., Jr, Myers J. D. Internist-1, an experimental computer-based diagnostic consultant for general internal medicine. N Engl J Med. 1982 Aug 19;307(8):468–476. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198208193070803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Miller R., Masarie F. E., Myers J. D. Quick medical reference (QMR) for diagnostic assistance. MD Comput. 1986 Sep-Oct;3(5):34–48. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Mitchell J. A., Johnson E. D., Hewett J. E., Proud V. K. Medical students using Grateful Med: analysis of failed searches and a six-month follow-up study. Comput Biomed Res. 1992 Feb;25(1):43–55. doi: 10.1016/0010-4809(92)90034-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Osheroff J. A., Bankowitz R. A. Physicians' use of computer software in answering clinical questions. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1993 Jan;81(1):11–19. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Osheroff J. A., Forsythe D. E., Buchanan B. G., Bankowitz R. A., Blumenfeld B. H., Miller R. A. Physicians' information needs: analysis of questions posed during clinical teaching. Ann Intern Med. 1991 Apr 1;114(7):576–581. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-114-7-576. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Roderer N. K., Clayton P. D. IAIMS at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center: accomplishments and challenges. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1992 Jul;80(3):253–262. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Salton G. Developments in automatic text retrieval. Science. 1991 Aug 30;253(5023):974–980. doi: 10.1126/science.253.5023.974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Sewell W., Teitelbaum S. Observations of end-user online searching behavior over eleven years. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1986 Jul;37(4):234–245. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198607)37:4<234::AID-ASI9>3.0.CO;2-A. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Slingluff D., Lev Y., Eisan A. An end user search service in an academic health sciences library. Med Ref Serv Q. 1985 Spring;4(1):11–21. doi: 10.1300/j115v04n01_02. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Walker C. J., McKibbon K. A., Haynes R. B., Ramsden M. F. Problems encountered by clinical end users of MEDLINE and GRATEFUL MED. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1991 Jan;79(1):67–69. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Bulletin of the Medical Library Association are provided here courtesy of Medical Library Association

RESOURCES