Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Feb 15;8(1):149-161.
doi: 10.4338/ACI-2016-06-RA-0083.

Measuring Practicing Clinicians' Information Literacy. An Exploratory Analysis in the Context of Panel Management

Brian E Dixon  1 , Katherine Barboza, Ashley E Jensen, Katelyn J Bennett, Scott E Sherman, Mark D Schwartz
Affiliations

Measuring Practicing Clinicians' Information Literacy. An Exploratory Analysis in the Context of Panel Management

Brian E Dixon et al. Appl Clin Inform. .

Abstract

Background: As healthcare moves towards technology-driven population health management, clinicians must adopt complex digital platforms to access health information and document care.

Objectives: This study explored information literacy, a set of skills required to effectively navigate population health information systems, among primary care providers in one Veterans' Affairs (VA) medical center.

Methods: Information literacy was assessed during an 8-month randomized trial that tested a population health (panel) management intervention. Providers were asked about their use and comfort with two VA digital tools for panel management at baseline, 16 weeks, and post-intervention. An 8-item scale (range 0-40) was used to measure information literacy (Cronbach's α=0.84). Scores between study arms and provider types were compared using paired t-tests and ANOVAs. Associations between self-reported digital tool use and information literacy were measured via Pearson's correlations.

Results: Providers showed moderate levels of information literacy (M= 27.4, SD 6.5). There were no significant differences in mean information literacy between physicians (M=26.4, SD 6.7) and nurses (M=30.5, SD 5.2, p=0.57 for difference), or between intervention (M=28.4, SD 6.5) and control groups (M=25.1, SD 6.2, p=0.12 for difference). Information literacy was correlated with higher rates of self-reported information system usage (r=0.547, p=0.001). Clinicians identified data access, accuracy, and interpretability as potential information literacy barriers.

Conclusions: While exploratory in nature, cautioning generalizability, the study suggests that measuring and improving clinicians' information literacy may play a significant role in the implementation and use of digital information tools, as these tools are rapidly being deployed to enhance communication among care teams, improve health care outcomes, and reduce overall costs.

Keywords: Information systems; health services needs and demand; human engineering or usability; informatics; information literacy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest

Several authors (BED, KJB, SES, MDS) are employed at either the VA New York Harbor Healthcare Systems in New York, New York, or the Richard L. Roudebush Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Indianapolis, Indiana. As such, they receive at least a portion of their annual salary from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Information Literacy Scale Mean Scores
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Singh H, Spitzmueller C, Petersen NJ, Sawhney MK, Sittig DF. Information overload and missed test results in electronic health record-based settings. JAMA internal medicine 2013; 173(8): 702-704. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zeldes N, Baum N. Information overload in medical practice. The Journal of medical practice management : MPM 2011; 26(5): 314-316. - PubMed
    1. Jha AK, Burke MF, DesRoches C, Joshi MS, Kralovec PD, Campbell EG, Buntin MB. Progress toward meaningful use: hospitals‘ adoption of electronic health records. The American journal of managed care 2011; 17(12 Spec No.): SP117-SP124. - PubMed
    1. Xierali IM, Hsiao CJ, Puffer JC, Green LA, Rinaldo JC, Bazemore AW, Burke MT, Phillips RL., Jr. The rise of electronic health record adoption among family physicians. Annals of family medicine 2013; 11(1): 14-19. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Whipple EC, Dixon BE, McGowan JJ. Linking health information technology to patient safety and quality outcomes: a bibliometric analysis and review. Inform Health Soc Care 2013; 38(1):1–14. - PubMed

MeSH terms