A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial

Objective: In educating students in the health professions about evidence-based practice, instructors and librarians typically use the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) framework for asking clinical questions. A recent study proposed an alternative framework for the rehabilitation pr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lorie A. Kloda, Jill T. Boruff, Alexandre Soares Cavalcante
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University Library System, University of Pittsburgh 2020-04-01
Series:Journal of the Medical Library Association
Subjects:
Online Access:http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/739
id doaj-8c4d2cb2c9f54ec5b99b5b3df87a4a73
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8c4d2cb2c9f54ec5b99b5b3df87a4a732020-11-25T02:21:23ZengUniversity Library System, University of PittsburghJournal of the Medical Library Association1536-50501558-94392020-04-01108210.5195/jmla.2020.739472A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trialLorie A. Kloda0Jill T. Boruff1Alexandre Soares Cavalcante2Associate University Librarian, Planning & Community Relations, Library, Concordia University, 1455 boulevard de Maisonneuve O. LB-331.17, Montreal, QC, H3G 1M8Schulich Library of Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, and Engineering, McGill University, 809 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 0C1Doctoral (PhD) Candidate, Faculty of Education, McGill University, Montreal, QCObjective: In educating students in the health professions about evidence-based practice, instructors and librarians typically use the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) framework for asking clinical questions. A recent study proposed an alternative framework for the rehabilitation professions. The present study investigated the effectiveness of teaching the alternative framework in an educational setting. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with students in occupational therapy (OT) and physical therapy (PT) to determine if the alternative framework for asking clinical questions was effective for identifying information needs and searching the literature. Participants were randomly allocated to a control or experimental group to receive ninety minutes of information literacy instruction from a librarian about formulating clinical questions and searching the literature using MEDLINE. The control group received instruction that included the PICO question framework, and the experimental group received instruction that included the alternative framework. Results: There were no significant differences in search performance or search skills (strategy and clinical question formulation) between the two groups. Both the control and experimental groups demonstrated a modest but significant increase in information literacy self-efficacy after the instruction; however, there was no difference between the two groups. Conclusion: When taught in an information literacy session, the new, alternative framework is as effective as PICO when assessing OT and PT students’ searching skills. Librarian-led workshops using either question formulation framework led to an increase in information literacy self-efficacy post-instruction.http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/739evidence-based practiceinformation literacyrandomized controlled trialclinical questionsinformation needsrehabilitation sciences
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Lorie A. Kloda
Jill T. Boruff
Alexandre Soares Cavalcante
spellingShingle Lorie A. Kloda
Jill T. Boruff
Alexandre Soares Cavalcante
A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
Journal of the Medical Library Association
evidence-based practice
information literacy
randomized controlled trial
clinical questions
information needs
rehabilitation sciences
author_facet Lorie A. Kloda
Jill T. Boruff
Alexandre Soares Cavalcante
author_sort Lorie A. Kloda
title A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
title_short A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
title_full A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort comparison of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (pico) to a new, alternative clinical question framework for search skills, search results, and self-efficacy: a randomized controlled trial
publisher University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
series Journal of the Medical Library Association
issn 1536-5050
1558-9439
publishDate 2020-04-01
description Objective: In educating students in the health professions about evidence-based practice, instructors and librarians typically use the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) framework for asking clinical questions. A recent study proposed an alternative framework for the rehabilitation professions. The present study investigated the effectiveness of teaching the alternative framework in an educational setting. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with students in occupational therapy (OT) and physical therapy (PT) to determine if the alternative framework for asking clinical questions was effective for identifying information needs and searching the literature. Participants were randomly allocated to a control or experimental group to receive ninety minutes of information literacy instruction from a librarian about formulating clinical questions and searching the literature using MEDLINE. The control group received instruction that included the PICO question framework, and the experimental group received instruction that included the alternative framework. Results: There were no significant differences in search performance or search skills (strategy and clinical question formulation) between the two groups. Both the control and experimental groups demonstrated a modest but significant increase in information literacy self-efficacy after the instruction; however, there was no difference between the two groups. Conclusion: When taught in an information literacy session, the new, alternative framework is as effective as PICO when assessing OT and PT students’ searching skills. Librarian-led workshops using either question formulation framework led to an increase in information literacy self-efficacy post-instruction.
topic evidence-based practice
information literacy
randomized controlled trial
clinical questions
information needs
rehabilitation sciences
url http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/739
work_keys_str_mv AT lorieakloda acomparisonofpatientinterventioncomparisonoutcomepicotoanewalternativeclinicalquestionframeworkforsearchskillssearchresultsandselfefficacyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT jilltboruff acomparisonofpatientinterventioncomparisonoutcomepicotoanewalternativeclinicalquestionframeworkforsearchskillssearchresultsandselfefficacyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT alexandresoarescavalcante acomparisonofpatientinterventioncomparisonoutcomepicotoanewalternativeclinicalquestionframeworkforsearchskillssearchresultsandselfefficacyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lorieakloda comparisonofpatientinterventioncomparisonoutcomepicotoanewalternativeclinicalquestionframeworkforsearchskillssearchresultsandselfefficacyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT jilltboruff comparisonofpatientinterventioncomparisonoutcomepicotoanewalternativeclinicalquestionframeworkforsearchskillssearchresultsandselfefficacyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT alexandresoarescavalcante comparisonofpatientinterventioncomparisonoutcomepicotoanewalternativeclinicalquestionframeworkforsearchskillssearchresultsandselfefficacyarandomizedcontrolledtrial
_version_ 1724866552611733504