| Over 100 years ago, the American Medical Association published an editorial discussing how the "flood" of new medical studies had made it impossible for people to keep up with the latest research. National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" recently examined the flood of information regarding health in medical journals and the media. The host of the show, Linda Wertheimer, interviewed Bradford Kirkman-Liff, professor of health management at Arizona State University, who echoed the editorial from 100 years ago and added that "If JAMA was right... 100 years ago, surely they're even more right today." Furthermore, the professor believes that it is virtually "impossible to keep up with the literature in more than one field at any time." The editorial from 1901 laments the overwhelming amount of medical information available in libraries and journals. It continues by stating that the plethora of studies and articles makes conducting research "exceedingly irksome and laborious." The editorial concludes, "In the interest of higher standards and greater concentration and accessibility of our medical literature, an appeal must be made to the self-criticism of those who write. Let not your literary activity be measured by the number of papers and addresses printed each year, or by their length, but solely by the quality. And when publishers tempt you to cover again some well-trodden field, yield not!" How can medical professionals survive this flood of information? The peer-reviewed system has created a much higher level of quality in published research. However, the professor posits that there is still a large number of "redundant publications" and that it "is still hard to separate the wheat from the chaff." Using Evidence Based Medicine databases such as Cochrane definitely help in finding relevant information, but readers are still trying to manage their intake of medical information. Related Links: |
