RESPONSE #1 is Below:

Hi Amelia!

You mentioned methods of research prior to HIT. What a difference! I remember sitting in the library for hours with my mother while she was working on her master’s degree. At that point about 20 years ago, I think there was one huge computer or paper directory that listed article names only. Then you had to locate the journal among thousands of others, find the article, then review it to see if it was even relevant to your own research. Microfilm was even more painstaking! Without advances in HIT, remote online education would be irrelevant. HIT has definitely made research more user-friendly. However, “the sheer quantity of information does not by itself create a more informed citizenry without complimentary abilities to use this information effectively” (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2015, p. 412).

With so much information available to us, especially from internet search engines, what recommendations would you make to a lay-person ‘googling’ medical information so that they could determine the information’s validity?

Reference

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2015). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.

Thanks for your post Amelia. What sort of evidence was shown in Stoop’s article? Were educational outcomes for patients studied in some kind of way? How was evidence produced using research? Would love to hear more, I think you have a very interesting practice concern.

Dr. Rodgers