Evaluation of email alerts in practice: Part 2 - validation of the information assessment method

• Published in: Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Vol. 16; no. 6; pp. 1236 - 1243
• Main Authors: Pluye, Pierre, Grad, Roland M., Johnson-Lafleur, Janique, Bambrick, Tara, Burnand, Bernard, Mercer, Jay, Marlow, Bernard, Campbell, Craig
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.12.2010
• Subjects: Biomedical Research; Canada; clinical emailing channels; continuing medical education; Education, Medical, Continuing - methods; Electronic Mail; email alerts; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Female; Humans; Interviews as Topic; knowledge translation; Male; Middle Aged; Physicians; Canada
• ISSN: 1356-1294; 1365-2753
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01313.x

Rationale and objective  The information assessment method (IAM) permits health professionals to systematically document the relevance, cognitive impact, use and health outcomes of information objects delivered by or retrieved from electronic knowledge resources. The companion review paper (Part 1) critically examined the literature, and proposed a ‘Push‐Pull‐Acquisition‐Cognition‐Application’ evaluation framework, which is operationalized by IAM. The purpose of the present paper (Part 2) is to examine the content validity of the IAM cognitive checklist when linked to email alerts. Methods  A qualitative component of a mixed methods study was conducted with 46 doctors reading and rating research‐based synopses sent on email. The unit of analysis was a doctor's explanation of a rating of one item regarding one synopsis. Interviews with participants provided 253 units that were analysed to assess concordance with item definitions. Results and conclusion  The content relevance of seven items was supported. For three items, revisions were needed. Interviews suggested one new item. This study has yielded a 2008 version of IAM.