You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Content analysis of clinical questions from Australian general practice which are prioritised for answering: identifying common question types and perceived knowledge gaps

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Original EBM Research
Primary care
Content analysis of clinical questions from Australian general practice which are prioritised for answering: identifying common question types and perceived knowledge gaps

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111210

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    PDF extract preview

    You do not have access to the full text of this article, the first page of the PDF of this article appears above.

    Footnotes

    • Contributors LT, DMM, TH and PP conceived of this study and its design, and were responsible for data collection. LT, DMM, PP and SR performed the content analysis and coding, and all authors were involved in interpreting the results. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

    • Funding This project was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council Centre for Research Excellence (ID: 1106452).

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Ethics approval The study was approved by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (Protocol # 2016/1011).

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.