Young Kidney Professionals' Perspectives and Attitudes about Consuming Scientific Information: A Focus Group Study

Abstract

The digital era has seen rapid changes in how information is consumed. Traditional dissemination of scholarly work through biomedical journals may not be optimally tailored to the preferences of younger clinicians and researchers. We aimed to describe the perspectives of young clinicians and researchers in kidney disease on consuming scientific information. Three focus groups were conducted during the 2017 American Society of Nephrology Kidney Week with a total of 29 nephrologists and researchers (ages 40 years old and younger) purposively sampled through our networks and the American Society of Nephrology registration database. Data were analyzed thematically. Of the 72 participants invited, 29 participated from 28 centers across 13 countries. Five themes were identified: capturing and retaining attention (with subthemes of triggering interest, optimizing readability, and navigation to sustain motivation); having discernible relevance (resonating with clinical and research interests, supporting professional development, action-oriented and readily applicable, able to disseminate, contextualizing the study, and filtering out informational noise); immediacy and efficiency in processing information (requiring instantaneous and easy access, enabling rapid understanding, and facilitating comprehension of complex concepts); trusting legitimate and credible sources (authoritative indicator of importance and quality, reputable experts broadening perspective, certainty and confidence with collegial input, accurate framing and translation of the message, ascertaining methodologic detail and nuances, and integrating the patient perspective); and social dialoguing and debate. Immediate and digitally optimized access motivated young kidney professionals to consume scientific information. Mechanisms that enable them to distil relevant and new evidence, appraise and apply information to clinical practice and research, disseminate studies to colleagues, and engage in discussion and debate may enhance their comprehension, confidence, interpretation, and use of scientific literature.

Keywords: Attention; Attitude; Comprehension; Focus Groups; Kidney Diseases; Motivation; Nephrologists; Orientation, Spatial; Research; Research Personnel; nephrology; renal failure.

Figure 1.

The themes and subthemes are depicted in this figure, and the arrows indicate the conceptual links between themes. From the left, on being alerted to journal articles, participants needed to be able to easily discern the relevance of the article to their clinical practice, research, or general professional development and wanted to be able to access and understand the information readily. However, prioritizing and contextualizing the information were challenging, and they considered the legitimacy and credibility of the information. Participants believed that they had a responsibility to critically appraise the study when deemed necessary. They also drew on opinions from trusted experts and colleagues to gauge the novelty, relevance, and validity of the information, and they valued opportunities to engage in discussion, dialogue, and debate to gain a broader view on the topic. The social dialoguing and debate provided an opportunity to hear from experts in the field, and at the same time, they drew their attention to the article being discussed, particularly in social media platforms.