Methods of Observing Variations in Physicians’ Decisions: The Opportunities of Clinical Vignettes

ABSTRACT To support their efforts to promote high quality and efficient care, policymakers need to better understand the key factors associated with variations in physicians’ decisions, and in particular, physician deviations from evidence-based care. Clinical vignette survey instruments hold potent...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM 2015-08, Vol.30 (Suppl 3), p.586-594
Main Authors: Converse, Lara, Barrett, Kirsten, Rich, Eugene, Reschovsky, James
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Clinical Decision-Making - methods
Clinical medicine
Decision making
Evidence-based medicine
Evidence-Based Medicine - methods
Humans
Internal Medicine
Medical Records
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Physicians
Point-of-Care Systems
Practice Patterns, Physicians
Primary care
Quality of care
Review
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63
container_end_page 594
container_issue Suppl 3
container_start_page 586
container_title Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM
container_volume 30
creator Converse, Lara
Barrett, Kirsten
Rich, Eugene
Reschovsky, James
description ABSTRACT To support their efforts to promote high quality and efficient care, policymakers need to better understand the key factors associated with variations in physicians’ decisions, and in particular, physician deviations from evidence-based care. Clinical vignette survey instruments hold potential for research in this area as an approach that both allows for practical, large-scale study and overcomes the data quality challenges posed by analysis of clinical data. These surveys present respondents with a narrative description of a hypothetical patient case and solicit responses to one or more questions regarding the care of the patient. In this review, we describe various methods for measuring variations in physicians’ decisions and highlight a range of design features researchers should consider when developing a clinical vignette survey. We conclude by identifying areas for future research.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11606-015-3365-8
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4512963</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1699202717</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kb1uFDEURi1ERDaBB6BBlmhoJvG_PRRI0RIIUtBShLSWx2PvOpq1F9sTKR2vwevxJMywIQpIVC6-c4_v1QfAS4xOMELytGAskGgQ5g2lgjfqCVhgTniDWSufggVSijVKUnYIjkq5QQhTQtQzcEgERlxIsgD2s6ub1BeYPFx1xeXbENfw2uRgakixwBDhl81dCTaYWH5-_wHfOxvKHL2FVxsHV7tdynWMoQb327IcQgzWDPA6rKOr1ZXn4MCbobgX9-8x-Prh_Gp50VyuPn5anl02ljNUG8WdsBRTQbzoROe5IaY1naCW0p4z5qetlcdMdn3vCMe8E8grRlXrTCu9oMfg3d67G7ut662LNZtB73LYmnynkwn67ySGjV6nW804Jq2gk-DNvSCnb6MrVW9DsW4YTHRpLBqLtiWISCwn9PU_6E0ac5zOmylFiWzpLMR7yuZUSnb-YRmM9Fyh3leopwr1XKFW08yrx1c8TPzpbALIHihTFNcuP_r6v9ZfcaSo1w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1698327933</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Methods of Observing Variations in Physicians’ Decisions: The Opportunities of Clinical Vignettes</title><source>PubMed Central(OpenAccess)</source><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Converse, Lara ; Barrett, Kirsten ; Rich, Eugene ; Reschovsky, James</creator><creatorcontrib>Converse, Lara ; Barrett, Kirsten ; Rich, Eugene ; Reschovsky, James</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT To support their efforts to promote high quality and efficient care, policymakers need to better understand the key factors associated with variations in physicians’ decisions, and in particular, physician deviations from evidence-based care. Clinical vignette survey instruments hold potential for research in this area as an approach that both allows for practical, large-scale study and overcomes the data quality challenges posed by analysis of clinical data. These surveys present respondents with a narrative description of a hypothetical patient case and solicit responses to one or more questions regarding the care of the patient. In this review, we describe various methods for measuring variations in physicians’ decisions and highlight a range of design features researchers should consider when developing a clinical vignette survey. We conclude by identifying areas for future research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0884-8734</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1497</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11606-015-3365-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26105672</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Clinical Decision-Making - methods ; Clinical medicine ; Decision making ; Evidence-based medicine ; Evidence-Based Medicine - methods ; Humans ; Internal Medicine ; Medical Records ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Physicians ; Point-of-Care Systems ; Practice Patterns, Physicians ; Primary care ; Quality of care ; Review</subject><ispartof>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2015-08, Vol.30 (Suppl 3), p.586-594</ispartof><rights>Society of General Internal Medicine 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4512963/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4512963/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26105672$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Converse, Lara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barrett, Kirsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rich, Eugene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reschovsky, James</creatorcontrib><title>Methods of Observing Variations in Physicians’ Decisions: The Opportunities of Clinical Vignettes</title><title>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</title><addtitle>J GEN INTERN MED</addtitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><description>ABSTRACT To support their efforts to promote high quality and efficient care, policymakers need to better understand the key factors associated with variations in physicians’ decisions, and in particular, physician deviations from evidence-based care. Clinical vignette survey instruments hold potential for research in this area as an approach that both allows for practical, large-scale study and overcomes the data quality challenges posed by analysis of clinical data. These surveys present respondents with a narrative description of a hypothetical patient case and solicit responses to one or more questions regarding the care of the patient. In this review, we describe various methods for measuring variations in physicians’ decisions and highlight a range of design features researchers should consider when developing a clinical vignette survey. We conclude by identifying areas for future research.</description><subject>Clinical Decision-Making - methods</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Evidence-based medicine</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Medical Records</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Point-of-Care Systems</subject><subject>Practice Patterns, Physicians</subject><subject>Primary care</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Review</subject><issn>0884-8734</issn><issn>1525-1497</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kb1uFDEURi1ERDaBB6BBlmhoJvG_PRRI0RIIUtBShLSWx2PvOpq1F9sTKR2vwevxJMywIQpIVC6-c4_v1QfAS4xOMELytGAskGgQ5g2lgjfqCVhgTniDWSufggVSijVKUnYIjkq5QQhTQtQzcEgERlxIsgD2s6ub1BeYPFx1xeXbENfw2uRgakixwBDhl81dCTaYWH5-_wHfOxvKHL2FVxsHV7tdynWMoQb327IcQgzWDPA6rKOr1ZXn4MCbobgX9-8x-Prh_Gp50VyuPn5anl02ljNUG8WdsBRTQbzoROe5IaY1naCW0p4z5qetlcdMdn3vCMe8E8grRlXrTCu9oMfg3d67G7ut662LNZtB73LYmnynkwn67ySGjV6nW804Jq2gk-DNvSCnb6MrVW9DsW4YTHRpLBqLtiWISCwn9PU_6E0ac5zOmylFiWzpLMR7yuZUSnb-YRmM9Fyh3leopwr1XKFW08yrx1c8TPzpbALIHihTFNcuP_r6v9ZfcaSo1w</recordid><startdate>20150801</startdate><enddate>20150801</enddate><creator>Converse, Lara</creator><creator>Barrett, Kirsten</creator><creator>Rich, Eugene</creator><creator>Reschovsky, James</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150801</creationdate><title>Methods of Observing Variations in Physicians’ Decisions: The Opportunities of Clinical Vignettes</title><author>Converse, Lara ; Barrett, Kirsten ; Rich, Eugene ; Reschovsky, James</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Clinical Decision-Making - methods</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Evidence-based medicine</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Medical Records</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Point-of-Care Systems</topic><topic>Practice Patterns, Physicians</topic><topic>Primary care</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Converse, Lara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barrett, Kirsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rich, Eugene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reschovsky, James</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health Management Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Converse, Lara</au><au>Barrett, Kirsten</au><au>Rich, Eugene</au><au>Reschovsky, James</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Methods of Observing Variations in Physicians’ Decisions: The Opportunities of Clinical Vignettes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM</jtitle><stitle>J GEN INTERN MED</stitle><addtitle>J Gen Intern Med</addtitle><date>2015-08-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>Suppl 3</issue><spage>586</spage><epage>594</epage><pages>586-594</pages><issn>0884-8734</issn><eissn>1525-1497</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT To support their efforts to promote high quality and efficient care, policymakers need to better understand the key factors associated with variations in physicians’ decisions, and in particular, physician deviations from evidence-based care. Clinical vignette survey instruments hold potential for research in this area as an approach that both allows for practical, large-scale study and overcomes the data quality challenges posed by analysis of clinical data. These surveys present respondents with a narrative description of a hypothetical patient case and solicit responses to one or more questions regarding the care of the patient. In this review, we describe various methods for measuring variations in physicians’ decisions and highlight a range of design features researchers should consider when developing a clinical vignette survey. We conclude by identifying areas for future research.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>26105672</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11606-015-3365-8</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0884-8734
ispartof Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM, 2015-08, Vol.30 (Suppl 3), p.586-594
issn 0884-8734
1525-1497
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4512963
source PubMed Central(OpenAccess); Springer Nature
subjects Clinical Decision-Making - methods
Clinical medicine
Decision making
Evidence-based medicine
Evidence-Based Medicine - methods
Humans
Internal Medicine
Medical Records
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Physicians
Point-of-Care Systems
Practice Patterns, Physicians
Primary care
Quality of care
Review
title Methods of Observing Variations in Physicians’ Decisions: The Opportunities of Clinical Vignettes
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T21%3A15%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Methods%20of%20Observing%20Variations%20in%20Physicians%E2%80%99%20Decisions:%20The%20Opportunities%20of%20Clinical%20Vignettes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20general%20internal%20medicine%20:%20JGIM&rft.au=Converse,%20Lara&rft.date=2015-08-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=Suppl%203&rft.spage=586&rft.epage=594&rft.pages=586-594&rft.issn=0884-8734&rft.eissn=1525-1497&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11606-015-3365-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1699202717%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c540t-85e6c31362f6b6bf5a2a9ab63c33d544f2618f147bdde2515b60f84389ea97f63%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1698327933&rft_id=info:pmid/26105672&rfr_iscdi=true