Abstract
In a pretest-posttest panel survey of 595 eligible Maryland physicians practicing family or general medicine, internal medicine, cardiology, or nephrology, perceptions of consensus reports designed to alter medical practice are examined. On a 7-point scale, physicians reported positive or neutral views of descriptors, most favorably rating credible (mean = 2.25) and reliable (mean = 2.41), and least favorably rating biased (mean = 3.79). In a regression analysis of factors influencing changes in practice behavior congruent with consensus recommendations before and 1 year after the release of a consensus report on hypertension (8), these perceptions were not significant determinants. The strongest predictor of congruent practice behavior a year after the report was published was congruent practice behavior just prior to the report's release, and the second strongest predictor was perceived influence of the report's sources/sponsors.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 30-41 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Aug 1991 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Health Policy
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'physicians' perceptions of consensus reports'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver