<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:burst="http://xmlns.com/burst/0.1/" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:swrc="http://swrc.ontoware.org/ontology#" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"><channel rdf:about="http://www.bibsonomy.org/author/Zoe Stavri"><title>BibSonomy publications for /author/Zoe Stavri</title><link>BibSonomyburst/author/Zoe Stavri</link><description>BibSonomy RSS feed for /author/Zoe Stavri</description><dc:date>2012-02-16T11:01:39+01:00</dc:date><items><rdf:Seq><rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/22caf24adcef02eb04e3af0ce3bc612d8/diego_ma"/></rdf:Seq></items></channel><item rdf:about="http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/22caf24adcef02eb04e3af0ce3bc612d8/diego_ma"><title>A Taxonomy of Generic Clinical Questions: Classification Study</title><link>http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/22caf24adcef02eb04e3af0ce3bc612d8/diego_ma</link><dc:creator>diego_ma</dc:creator><dc:date>2008-02-01T06:26:37+01:00</dc:date><dc:subject>biomedicalquestions </dc:subject><content:encoded>&lt;span class=&#034;authorEditorList&#034;&gt;&lt;a href=&#034;/author/Ely&#034;&gt;John W. Ely&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&#034;/author/Osheroff&#034;&gt;Jerome A. Osheroff&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&#034;/author/Gorman&#034;&gt;Paul N Gorman&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&#034;/author/Ebell&#034;&gt;Mark H Ebell&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&#034;/author/Chambliss&#034;&gt;M. Lee Chambliss&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&#034;/author/Pifer&#034;&gt;Eric A. Pifer&lt;/a&gt;,  and &lt;a href=&#034;/author/Stavri&#034;&gt;P. Zoe Stavri&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;British Medical Journal&lt;/em&gt; &lt;em&gt;321(7258):429--432&lt;/em&gt; (&lt;em&gt;2000&lt;/em&gt;)</content:encoded><taxo:topics><rdf:Bag><rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.bibsonomy.org/tag/biomedicalquestions"/></rdf:Bag></taxo:topics><burst:publication><rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/22caf24adcef02eb04e3af0ce3bc612d8/diego_ma"><owl:sameAs rdf:resource="http://www.bibsonomy.org/uri/bibtex/22caf24adcef02eb04e3af0ce3bc612d8/diego_ma"/><rdf:type rdf:resource="http://swrc.ontoware.org/ontology#Article"/><owl:sameAs rdf:resource="http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&amp;pubmedid=10938054"/><swrc:date>Fri Feb 01 06:26:37 CET 2008</swrc:date><swrc:journal>British Medical Journal</swrc:journal><swrc:number>7258</swrc:number><swrc:pages>429--432</swrc:pages><swrc:title>A Taxonomy of Generic Clinical Questions: Classification Study</swrc:title><swrc:volume>321</swrc:volume><swrc:year>2000</swrc:year><swrc:keywords>biomedicalquestions </swrc:keywords><swrc:abstract>Objective: To develop a taxonomy of doctors&#039; questions about patient care that could be used to help answer such questions. Design: Use of 295 questions asked by Oregon primary care doctors to modify previously developed taxonomy of 1101 clinical questions asked by Iowa family doctors. Setting: Primary care practices in Iowa and Oregon. Participants: Random samples of 103 Iowa family doctors and 49 Oregon primary care doctors. Main outcome measures: Consensus among seven investigators on a meaningful taxonomy of generic questions; interrater reliability among 11 individuals who used the taxonomy to classify a random sample of 100 questions: 50 from Iowa and 50 from Oregon. Results: The revised taxonomy, which comprised 64 generic question types, was used to classify 1396 clinical questions. The three commonest generic types were {\grqq}What is the drug of choice for condition x???? (150 questions, 11\%); {\grqq}What is the cause of symptom x???? (115 questions, 8\%); and {\grqq}What test is indicated in situation x???? (112 questions, 8\%). The mean interrater reliability among 11 coders was moderate (??=0.53, agreement 55\%). Conclusions: Clinical questions in primary care can be categorised into a limited number of generic types. A moderate degree of interrater reliability was achieved with the taxonomy developed in this study. The taxonomy may enhance our understanding of doctors&#039; information needs and improve our ability to meet those needs.</swrc:abstract><swrc:hasExtraField><swrc:Field swrc:value="Web (Feb 2008)" swrc:key="library"/></swrc:hasExtraField><swrc:author><rdf:Seq><rdf:_1><swrc:Person swrc:name="John W. Ely"/></rdf:_1><rdf:_2><swrc:Person swrc:name="Jerome A. Osheroff"/></rdf:_2><rdf:_3><swrc:Person swrc:name="Paul N Gorman"/></rdf:_3><rdf:_4><swrc:Person swrc:name="Mark H Ebell"/></rdf:_4><rdf:_5><swrc:Person swrc:name="M. Lee Chambliss"/></rdf:_5><rdf:_6><swrc:Person swrc:name="Eric A. Pifer"/></rdf:_6><rdf:_7><swrc:Person swrc:name="P. Zoe Stavri"/></rdf:_7></rdf:Seq></swrc:author></rdf:Description></burst:publication></item></rdf:RDF>
