Young Kidney Professionals' Perspectives and Attitudes about Consuming Scientific Information: A Focus Group Study

The digital era has seen rapid changes in how information is consumed. Traditional dissemination of scholarly work through biomedical journals may not be optimally tailored to the preferences of younger clinicians and researchers. We aimed to describe the perspectives of young clinicians and researchers in kidney disease on consuming scientific information. Three focus groups were conducted during the 2017 American Society of Nephrology Kidney Week with a total of 29 nephrologists and researchers (ages 40 years old and younger) purposively sampled through our networks and the American Society of Nephrology registration database. Data were analyzed thematically. Of the 72 participants invited, 29 participated from 28 centers across 13 countries. Five themes were identified: capturing and retaining attention (with subthemes of triggering interest, optimizing readability, and navigation to sustain motivation); having discernible relevance (resonating with clinical and research interests, supporting professional development, action-oriented and readily applicable, able to disseminate, contextualizing the study, and filtering out informational noise); immediacy and efficiency in processing information (requiring instantaneous and easy access, enabling rapid understanding, and facilitating comprehension of complex concepts); trusting legitimate and credible sources (authoritative indicator of importance and quality, reputable experts broadening perspective, certainty and confidence with collegial input, accurate framing and translation of the message, ascertaining methodologic detail and nuances, and integrating the patient perspective); and social dialoguing and debate. Immediate and digitally optimized access motivated young kidney professionals to consume scientific information. Mechanisms that enable them to distil relevant and new evidence, appraise and apply information to clinical practice and research, disseminate studies to colleagues, and engage in discussion and debate may enhance their comprehension, confidence, interpretation, and use of scientific literature.