The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository
Warning ePrints Soton is experiencing an issue with some file downloads not being available. We are working hard to fix this. Please bear with us.

Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed "mindlines?" Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care

Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed "mindlines?" Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care
Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed "mindlines?" Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care
Objective: To explore in depth how primary care clinicians (general practitioners and practice nurses) derive their individual and collective healthcare decisions.
Design: Ethnographic study using standard methods (non-participant observation, semistructured interviews, and documentary review) over two years to collect data, which were analysed thematically.
Setting: Two general practices, one in the south of England and the other in the north of England.
Participants: Nine doctors, three nurses, one phlebotomist, and associated medical staff in one practice provided the initial data; the emerging model was checked for transferability with general practitioners in the second practice.
Results: Clinicians rarely accessed and used explicit evidence from research or other sources directly, but relied on "mindlines"—collectively reinforced, internalised, tacit guidelines. These were informed by brief reading but mainly by their own and their colleagues' experience, their interactions with each other and with opinion leaders, patients, and pharmaceutical representatives, and other sources of largely tacit knowledge. Mediated by organisational demands and constraints, mindlines were iteratively negotiated with a variety of key actors, often through a range of informal interactions in fluid "communities of practice," resulting in socially constructed "knowledge in practice."
Conclusions: These findings highlight the potential advantage of exploiting existing formal and informal networking as a key to conveying evidence to clinicians.
midwifery, publishing, general-practice, observation, interviews, nursing, model, design, time, health, methods, knowledge management, London, thumb, research, care, rules, England, nurses, primary-care, patients, review, guidelines, practitioners
0959-8138
1013-1019
Gabbay, John
d779b76c-febe-461b-b3bb-e110163f114a
le May, Andrée
d31b0269-60f6-47cd-a844-f0bc522662ab
Gabbay, John
d779b76c-febe-461b-b3bb-e110163f114a
le May, Andrée
d31b0269-60f6-47cd-a844-f0bc522662ab

Gabbay, John and le May, Andrée (2004) Evidence based guidelines or collectively constructed "mindlines?" Ethnographic study of knowledge management in primary care. BMJ, 329 (7473), 1013-1019. (doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7473.1013).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objective: To explore in depth how primary care clinicians (general practitioners and practice nurses) derive their individual and collective healthcare decisions.
Design: Ethnographic study using standard methods (non-participant observation, semistructured interviews, and documentary review) over two years to collect data, which were analysed thematically.
Setting: Two general practices, one in the south of England and the other in the north of England.
Participants: Nine doctors, three nurses, one phlebotomist, and associated medical staff in one practice provided the initial data; the emerging model was checked for transferability with general practitioners in the second practice.
Results: Clinicians rarely accessed and used explicit evidence from research or other sources directly, but relied on "mindlines"—collectively reinforced, internalised, tacit guidelines. These were informed by brief reading but mainly by their own and their colleagues' experience, their interactions with each other and with opinion leaders, patients, and pharmaceutical representatives, and other sources of largely tacit knowledge. Mediated by organisational demands and constraints, mindlines were iteratively negotiated with a variety of key actors, often through a range of informal interactions in fluid "communities of practice," resulting in socially constructed "knowledge in practice."
Conclusions: These findings highlight the potential advantage of exploiting existing formal and informal networking as a key to conveying evidence to clinicians.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 30 October 2004
Keywords: midwifery, publishing, general-practice, observation, interviews, nursing, model, design, time, health, methods, knowledge management, London, thumb, research, care, rules, England, nurses, primary-care, patients, review, guidelines, practitioners

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 12569
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/12569
ISSN: 0959-8138
PURE UUID: 4f64f790-2f72-4bdc-ad7c-9d4139874381

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 25 May 2006
Last modified: 09 Jan 2022 04:55

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: John Gabbay
Author: Andrée le May

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×