---

Introduction: Determining the information needs of stakeholders, including dialytic patients is of great importance in designing a better electronic health record at the national level.. In this study various information needs on Electronic Health Records of dialytic patients from nephrologists’ viewpoints were investigated.

Methods: In his descriptive cross sectional study, research population included 25 nephrologists who were working in dialysis centers in Tehran. A seven part questionnaire including (demographic information, public, diagnosis, treatment, history, status and others related to the types of information needs on electronic records of dialytic patients was used. Sample population rated essential items from one to ten. Data analysis was done with SPSS by taking the mean rating given to each case.

 Results: In ranking, the highest means reported, were first names and family names in medical documentaion (9.2), blood groups and number of medical documentation (9.5), test and test results (9.7), type of dialysis (9.8), history of abdominal surgery and transplantation (9.6), cause of kidney failure (6.9) recommendations after discharge and clinical alerts (8.4) and the lowest average belonged to marital status (6.4), electronic signature (7.5), radiology results (9), date of installing catheter (8.8), family history (8.4), congenital anomalies (8.4) and financial report (6.8)

Conclusion: In designing electronic health records of dialytic patients documentation number, blood group, test and test results, type of dialysis, history of surgery and transplantation, cause of kidney failure, discharge recommendations and clinical alerts need to be prioritised. Producing electronic health records for dialytic patients based on the stakeholders’ needs is highly important, therefore it is necessary that essential measures be adopted in this area.

---

Introduction: Clinical specialists need to develop necessary information skills to meet their research requirements. The current study focused on the effect of educational interventions by clinical informationists on medical students’ information behavior.
Methods: This was a semi-experimental study in which a two group  pretest–posttest design was used. The population consisted of 60 medical students (30 in the experimental and 30 in the control group at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences) who were selected through the convenience time based sequential sampling method. A researcher-made questionnaire including 19 items based on a 5-point Likert scale (very little to very high) was used to collect data which were then analyzed by SPSS using the descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results: The trainings offered by the clinical informationists motivated the experimental group to focus on seeking information about clinical issues. Following the intervention, the experimental group achieved significantly higher need to search for information, during and after clinical rounds, than the control group. Moreover, the use of electronic information resources and clinical databases in the experimental group was significantly higher than the control group.
Conclusions: Considering the importance of electronic information resources, universities of medical sciences are required to teach the use of databases, specifically as part of the medical students' curriculums and medical education programs.