2013 TMR PHYSICIAN SURVEY - The Value of Experience

Presented by:

2013 Physician Surveyinsights into the

Value of Experience

www.TheMedicalRoundtable.com

http://www.TheMedicalRoundtable.com/

dedicated to the expression of

Clinical Experience

about Empirical

Evidence

Opinion & Empirical Evidencewww.TheMedicalRoundtable.com

TRUST• publisher policies

• medical copyediting• accuracy review

• referencing• transparency

PEER REVIEW• opinion based

• accuracy• undue bias

• rooted in the evidence

REPUTATION• clinical expert speakers

• vetting experience• balanced panels• professionalism

DISCLOSURE• faculty conflicts• funding sources

• honoraria• content control

CREATINGINTEGRITY

The Medical Roundtable creates

integrity for expert opinion based upon

empirical data.

Survey Designwww.TheMedicalRoundtable.com

Email invitation sent to 5,000 US physicians selected at

random 17% open rate (903) 31% response rate (288) of openers 5% response rate of invited physicians empirical data presented scrubbed of non-physician

responses iPad Mini sweepstakes offered 10 day response period

November 20 – 30, 2013 Free access to online roundtables including: The

Role of Experience in an Evidence-Based Practice

TMR conducted an anonymous online survey:

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1862798/GM96328-Guyatt_TonelliWM.pdf



Who took the 2013 survey?

88% Physicians (MD, DO) 7% Scientists (PhD)*

4% Physician Assistants (PA)*


*Empirical data results presented scrubbed of non-physician responses.

Geographic Distribution (optional response)

Age Distribution (optional response)

doctors value and seek

expert opinion

Doctors Want Expert Interactionwww.TheMedicalRoundtable.com

UNSOLICITED FROM COMMUNITY CLINICIAN:

I really think The Medical Roundtable is a wonderful opportunity for us, to get updated with the latest research, experts’ opinion and interacting with the experts. I am so glad that I am subscribed with this journal.

Sincerely,

Marina Behrad, MD |Community Health Network | Indianapolis, IN

Physicians Value Discussion Among Peers


Physicians prefer* learning from reading journals first, then peer discussion and CME meetings.

*Weighted average scale ratings.

% VALUE “mostly”:

49.1% reading journals

43.4% live CME

40.2% peer discussion

19.6% online video

13.2% webinars

10.7% podcasts

RANKINGS “mostly” & “sometimes”:

3.39 reading journals

3.26 peer discussion

3.25 live CME

2.79 online video

2.50 webinars

2.38 podcasts

never (1) sparingly (2) sometimes (3) mostly (4)

Some Readers Need Perspective*

Respondents expressed need for interpretation about the empirical evidence combined with valuable perspective:

“I feel less able to critique a study’s design and tend to rely on the experts for that”

“combines clinical trial info & expert interpretation/applications”

“offers expert point of view in addition”

“more than one opinion on the results is important”

“helps me see different sides”

“more input and interpretation”

“good to get various viewpoints”

“provides perspective of all three [original trial, review, expert opinion]”

“it gives a trusted perspective on the topic”

“like to hear/read expert interpretations and thoughts”


*In response to question “Why do you prefer roundtable discussions over clinical trials and reviews?”

Physicians Prefer Expert Panel Discussions

Given the choice of only one: 38% would choose Expert Panel Discussion 31% would choose Original Trial Paper 29% would choose Review Paper


Physicians are: 7% more likely to read

roundtable than original trial 9.4% more likely to read

roundtable than a review paper

Asked why? - Physicians: who preferred original and

review articles expressed desire to self-evaluate data

who preferred roundtables expressed value of combining critical data and expert evaluation to save time, seek experienced guidance, and test their knowledge

Respondents could choose only one answer and optionally provide a reason for their choice.

Respondents Test Themselves Against Experts*

Roundtables allow the reader to formulate and test their own practice perspectives:

“a discussion with experts allows me to see independent opinions on that subject and allow me to better formulate my own interpretations on the validity and accuracy of the topic”

“it either bolsters my opinion or explains nuances which I might have missed”

“I like hearing other opinions which helps me to clarify my own opinion”

“Love the instantaneous response from other professionals to intermix with my own”



Self-Evaluation of Trial Results*

Physicians expressed a desire to read original clinical trial and review papers over roundtable discussions because:

“want to review methodology for myself”

“avoid ‘spin’”

“I would like to see the methodology and results from the first PI group, in my opinion, reviews and roundtables are readings that come after”

“original data available”

“review of short comings and strengths and practical aspects”

“I like to see the methods and analysis used”

“I would like to form my own opinion about the paper”

“I can make my own conclusions!”


*In response to question “Why do you prefer clinical trials and reviews over roundtable discussions?”

Peer Discussion Influences Patient Treatment

Peer Discussion ranked 4th most influential Sharp drop from 4th to remaining influencers


CME meetings (3.66) and Peer Discussion (3.95) hold equivalent influence on patient treatment decisions

Δ=1.25

Readers Perceive Value Beyond Data*

Readers seek “unpublished” information and consensus from roundtables:

“expert discussions are probably most valuable in making a difference in patient care and would be helpful to manage complex and uncommon conditions more appropriately”

“I find roundtable discussions to contain very good information that may involve non-FDA approved indications”

“they allow the sharing of information and data that may not get published but is personal to those experts”

“roundtable expert discussions allow clinical experience and ‘wisdom’ to shed light on evidence-based practice, in much the same way that a master chef would outperform a computer in the kitchen”

“the discussions support collaboration with experts and peers to bolster consensus”



“Experts” are Clinicians who Touch Patients

① Most valued criteria for an expert is Clinical Experience

② # of patients touched

③ # of journal articles / institutional affiliation


TMR selects experts who meet these criteria to engage readers and build trust with our audience

While publishing papers and authorship are valuable, hands on clinical experience is pivotal in determining value of the expert discussion

Expert Discussions Provide Clinical Value


37% “disagreed” with with the statement:

Expert discussion provides nothing more than a good review article.

Only 2% “strongly agreed” and 19% “agreed”

Physicians “strongly agree” or “agree” that:

Expert discussion provides….

- a valuable source of information (92%)

- confirmation of their own knowledge (83%)

- perspectives valuable to shape their own views (79%)

Respondents Consider Roundtables Easy*

Roundtables remove the hurdles to learning by being easy to read and time-saving:

“well-discussed in this manner”

“cuts to the chase”

“the experts can distill the essence of the trial, saving me valuable time”

“easily digested”

“brief, time constraints”

“more concise”

“easier to read”



Physicians attend CME, but want discussion

91% would give their valuable time after a scientific conference to listen to an impromptu expert panel discussion

47% would remain for at least 30 minutes


Holding a roundtable discussion after the CME event can educate the audience with information they seek

A physician’s time is valuable – but only 6% believe the core CME presentation is sufficient and almost all would stay for the impromptu discussion

Physician Survey Summarywww.TheMedicalRoundtable.com

Survey Confirms: Physicians consider peer discussion a preferred learning format. More Physicians would choose to read a Roundtable Discussion over an Original Clinical

Trial or a Review Paper. Physicians like to read roundtables to:

test their knowledge assess opinions and perspectives of experts gain clarity and develop their own opinions

Among patient treatment influencers, peer discussion is equivalent to CME meetings. Physicians seek consensus and “unpublished” information from roundtable discussions. A physician is considered “expert” based primarily on his/her clinical experience and

patient volume. Physicians agree that expert discussion provides...

“a valuable source of information” “confirmation of their own knowledge” “perspectives valuable to shape their own views”

Physicians disagree that expert discussion provides… “nothing more than a good review article”

Physicians would eagerly remain after a CME live event for a 30 minute impromptu expert panel discussion

The Medical Roundtable is “easy to read” and a “time saver” removing hurdles to learning

Doctors Want Expert Interactionwww.TheMedicalRoundtable.com

Phone call from Seattle Physician Reader:

The Medical Roundtable is great because I get to see how what I do in my daily practice stacks up against what the experts recommend.

Reaction from NYU Physician Focus Interview:

I can see how [The Medical Roundtable] would help me stay in touch with thought leadership on guidelines and clinical trials – there’s too much to read and this is a great way for me to learn something valuable during my lunch period.

T. Anthony Howell | [email protected]

om203.253.5906

Have a seat at our table.


2013 TMR PHYSICIAN SURVEY - The Value of Experience

Health & Medicine

Transcript of 2013 TMR PHYSICIAN SURVEY - The Value of Experience