The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Obstacles to answering doctors' questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To describe the obstacles encountered when attempting to answer doctors' questions with evidence. Design: Qualitative study. Setting: General practices in Iowa. Participants: 9 academic generalist doctors, 14 family doctors, and 2 medical librarians. Main outcome measure: A taxonomy of obstacles encountered while searching for evidence based answers to doctors' questions. Results: 59 obstacles were encountered and organised according to the five steps in asking and answering questions: recognise a gap in knowledge, formulate a question, search for relevant information, formulate an answer, and use the answer to direct patient care. Six obstacles were considered particularly salient by the investigators and practising doctors: the excessive time required to find information; difficulty modifying the original question, which was often vague and open to interpretation; difficulty selecting an optimal strategy to search for information; failure of a seemingly appropriate resource to cover the topic; uncertainty about how to know when all the relevant evidence has been found so that the search can stop; and inadequate synthesis of multiple bits of evidence into a clinically useful statement. Conclusions: Many obstacles are encountered when asking and answering questions about how to care for patients. Addressing these obstacles could lead to better patient care by improving clinically oriented information resources. What is already known on this topic: Doctors are encouraged to search for evidence based answers to their questions about patient care but most go unanswered Studies have not defined the obstacles to answering questions in a systematic manner A comprehensive description of such obstacles has not been presented What this study adds: Fifty nine obstacles were found while attempting to answer clinical questions with evidence; six were particularly salient The obstacles were comprehensively described and organised
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/5657.001.0001 · Cited by 3,537
Crabtree, B. F., Miller, W. L., & Swenson, M. M. (1995) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-199507000-00011 · Cited by 956
Problems in the “Evidence” of “Evidence-Based Medicine”
Feinstein, A. R., & Horwitz, R. I. (1997) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(97)00244-1 · Cited by 653
Analysis of questions asked by family doctors regarding patient care
Ely, J. W., Osheroff, J. A., Ebell, M. H., Bergus, G. R., Levy, B. T., Chambliss, M. L., & Evans, E. R. (1999) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.319.7206.358 · Cited by 522
Self-citation
Cited by
Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions
Schardt, C., Adams, M. B., Owens, T., Keitz, S., & Fontelo, P. (2007) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-7-16 · Cited by 3,053
“The literature also reports that many clinical questions go unanswered due to difficulties formulating a relevant question [ 6 ], forgetting the question [7], lack of access to information resources, and lack of skills in searching [8].”
Disseminating Innovations in Health Care
Berwick, D. M. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.15.1969 · Cited by 1,878
The Global Burden of Diagnostic Errors in Primary Care
Singh, H., Schiff, G. D., Graber, M. L., Onakpoya, I., & Thompson, M. J. (2017) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2016-005401 · Cited by 395
Retrieving Clinical Evidence: A Comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar for Quick Clinical Searches
Shariff, S. Z., Bejaimal, S. A., Sontrop, J. M., Iansavichus, A. V., Haynes, R. B., Weir, M. A., & Garg, A. X. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2624 · Cited by 119
Helping Patients Improve Their Health-Related Behaviors: What System Changes Do We Need?
Bodenheimer, T. (2005) · Disease Management · doi:10.1089/dis.2005.8.319 · Cited by 88
Metadata
- Authors
- Ely, J. W., Osheroff, J. A., Ebell, M. H., Chambliss, M. L., Vinson, D. C., Stevermer, J. J., & Pifer, E. A.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-03-23
- Volume
- 324
- Issue
- 7339
- Pages
- 710
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2124893143
- Cited by
- 503
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 77.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Obstacles to answering doctors' questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.324.7339.710
- The paper
- Ely, J. W., Osheroff, J. A., Ebell, M. H., Chambliss, M. L., Vinson, D. C., Stevermer, J. J., & Pifer, E. A. (2002). Obstacles to answering doctors' questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7339.710
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
