Objective To investigate the output of evidence-based medicine (EBM) researchers in China and elsewhere by examining the EBM domains they work within and the networks that exist among them; using visualization methods to analyze these relationships. This maps the current situation and helps with the identification of areas for future growth. Method We used co-citation matrixes with Pathfinder networks and hierarchical clustering algorithms, and constructed a co-author matrix which were analyzed with a whole network approach. The analyzed matrixes were visualized with the UCINET program. Result Much of the development of EBM has been centered around three authors, David Sackett, Gordon Guyatt and L Manchikanti, within three different clusters. The main authors of EBM articles in China were divided into nine academic domains. The relations among core authors of articles indexed by the Science Citation Index (SCI) was loose. There was a ber co-authorship network among core authors in the Chinese literature, with three groups and 21 cliques. Nine distinct academic communities appeared to have formed around Li Youping, Liu Ming and Zhang Mingming. Conclusion The EBM literature contains several key clusters, with universities in high-income countries being the source of the majority of articles. Outside China, McMaster University in Canada, the original home of EBM, is the dominant producer of EBM publications. In China, Sichuan University is the main source of EBM publications. The EBM cooperation network in China is comprised of three major groups, the largest and most productive in this sample is led by Li Youping with Liu Ming, Zhang Mingming, Li Jing, Wang Li, Wu Taixiang, and Liu Guanjian as central members.
ObjectiveTo investigate primary healthcare workers' knowledge, attitude and behaviour, and explore the way of guidelines' popularization, application and surveillance mechanism in primary healthcare institutions. MethodsHealthcare workers in seven township hospitals in Gaolan county, Gansu province were given a questionnaire to test their knowledge, attitudes and behaviour regarding Clinical practice guidelines. ResultsAmong the 143 distributed questionnaires, 143 valid were retrieved. The results showed that 80% of respondents knew the guidelines and 51% had used guidelines in treatment, 32% obtained guidelines mainly through distribution by affiliations. The most popular type of guidelines was self-developed by native departments. Respondents (37%) considered difficult availability of guidelines major barriers to popularization, 74% failed to receive training about guidelines, 88% looked forward to special organizations in charge of disseminating guidelines and conducting related training on how to apply guidelines. ConclusionPrimary healthcare workers report low awareness of, attention to and compliance with clinical practice guidelines. The greatest challenge for guidelines' popularization in township hospitals is difficult availability and it is of vital importance for primary institutions to enhance guidelines' implementation and strengthen learning and conduct training.