‘Better’ clinical decisions do not necessarily require more time to make

Nicola McCleary; Jill J Francis; Marion K Campbell; Craig R Ramsay; Martin P Eccles; Shaun Treweek; Julia Allan

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.004

‘Better’ clinical decisions do not necessarily require more time to make

Nicola McCleary, Jill J Francis, Marion K Campbell, Craig R Ramsay, Martin P Eccles, Shaun Treweek, Julia Allan

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

8 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The web-based intervention modelling experiment (IME; randomised study in a simulated setting) reported by Treweek and colleagues [1] provided support for using IME methodology in the evaluation of interventions to improve quality of care. As well as the management decision made, Treweek and colleagues’ data on general practitioners’ (GPs) responses to scenarios describing uncomplicated Upper Respiratory Tract infection (URTI) included a measure of perceived decision difficulty for each decision, and the time taken to make each decision. To further inform the development of interventions to improve quality of care, we analysed these data, aiming to quantify the relationships between decision difficulty, decision
appropriateness, and the speed at which decisions were made.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	173–174
Number of pages	2
Journal	Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume	82
Early online date	15 Nov 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.004
Publication status	Published - 1 Feb 2017

Bibliographical note

Funding
The original study was funded by the Chief Scientist Office, grant number CZH/4/610. The analyses reported here were funded by a Medical Research Council Doctoral Training Grant awarded to the first author. The Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates. The funding sources had no role in the study design; the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication

Keywords

general practitioner
upper respiratory tract infection
clinical decision-making
antibiotic prescribing
patient scenario
Primary care
Cognition

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.004Licence: Unspecified

Accepted Manuscript
© 2016. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Accepted author manuscript, 23 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{b57f47417c74418688e3319760078cf1,

title = "{\textquoteleft}Better{\textquoteright} clinical decisions do not necessarily require more time to make",

abstract = "The web-based intervention modelling experiment (IME; randomised study in a simulated setting) reported by Treweek and colleagues [1] provided support for using IME methodology in the evaluation of interventions to improve quality of care. As well as the management decision made, Treweek and colleagues{\textquoteright} data on general practitioners{\textquoteright} (GPs) responses to scenarios describing uncomplicated Upper Respiratory Tract infection (URTI) included a measure of perceived decision difficulty for each decision, and the time taken to make each decision. To further inform the development of interventions to improve quality of care, we analysed these data, aiming to quantify the relationships between decision difficulty, decision appropriateness, and the speed at which decisions were made. ",

keywords = "general practitioner, upper respiratory tract infection, clinical decision-making, antibiotic prescribing, patient scenario, Primary care , Cognition ",

author = "Nicola McCleary and Francis, {Jill J} and Campbell, {Marion K} and Ramsay, {Craig R} and Eccles, {Martin P} and Shaun Treweek and Julia Allan",

note = "Funding The original study was funded by the Chief Scientist Office, grant number CZH/4/610. The analyses reported here were funded by a Medical Research Council Doctoral Training Grant awarded to the first author. The Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates. The funding sources had no role in the study design; the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication ",

year = "2017",

month = feb,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.004",

language = "English",

volume = "82",

pages = "173–174",

journal = "Journal of Clinical Epidemiology",

issn = "0895-4356",

publisher = "Elsevier USA",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘Better’ clinical decisions do not necessarily require more time to make

AU - McCleary, Nicola

AU - Francis, Jill J

AU - Campbell, Marion K

AU - Ramsay, Craig R

AU - Eccles, Martin P

AU - Treweek, Shaun

AU - Allan, Julia

N1 - Funding The original study was funded by the Chief Scientist Office, grant number CZH/4/610. The analyses reported here were funded by a Medical Research Council Doctoral Training Grant awarded to the first author. The Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates. The funding sources had no role in the study design; the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication

PY - 2017/2/1

Y1 - 2017/2/1

N2 - The web-based intervention modelling experiment (IME; randomised study in a simulated setting) reported by Treweek and colleagues [1] provided support for using IME methodology in the evaluation of interventions to improve quality of care. As well as the management decision made, Treweek and colleagues’ data on general practitioners’ (GPs) responses to scenarios describing uncomplicated Upper Respiratory Tract infection (URTI) included a measure of perceived decision difficulty for each decision, and the time taken to make each decision. To further inform the development of interventions to improve quality of care, we analysed these data, aiming to quantify the relationships between decision difficulty, decision appropriateness, and the speed at which decisions were made.

AB - The web-based intervention modelling experiment (IME; randomised study in a simulated setting) reported by Treweek and colleagues [1] provided support for using IME methodology in the evaluation of interventions to improve quality of care. As well as the management decision made, Treweek and colleagues’ data on general practitioners’ (GPs) responses to scenarios describing uncomplicated Upper Respiratory Tract infection (URTI) included a measure of perceived decision difficulty for each decision, and the time taken to make each decision. To further inform the development of interventions to improve quality of care, we analysed these data, aiming to quantify the relationships between decision difficulty, decision appropriateness, and the speed at which decisions were made.

KW - general practitioner

KW - upper respiratory tract infection

KW - clinical decision-making

KW - antibiotic prescribing

KW - patient scenario

KW - Primary care

KW - Cognition

U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.004

M3 - Article

SN - 0895-4356

VL - 82

SP - 173

EP - 174

JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

ER -

‘Better’ clinical decisions do not necessarily require more time to make

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this