Literature DB >> 20434023

User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful Summary of Findings tables for Cochrane reviews.

Sarah E Rosenbaum1, Claire Glenton, Hilde Kari Nylund, Andrew D Oxman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop a Summary of Findings (SoF) table for use in Cochrane reviews that is understandable and useful for health professionals, acceptable to Cochrane Collaboration stakeholders, and feasible to implement. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: We gathered stakeholder feedback on the format and content of an SoF table from an advisory group of more than 50 participants and their constituencies through e-mail consultations. We conducted user tests using a think-aloud protocol method, collecting feedback from 21 health professionals and researchers in Norway and the UK. We analyzed the feedback, defined problem areas, and generated new solutions in brainstorming workshops.
RESULTS: Stakeholders were concerned about precision in the data representation and about production feasibility. User testing revealed unexpected comprehension problems, mainly confusion about what the different numbers referred to (class reference). Resolving the tension between achieving table precision and table simplicity became the main focus of the working group.
CONCLUSION: User testing led to a table more useful and understandable for clinical audiences. We arrived at an SoF table that was acceptable to the stakeholders and in principle feasible to implement technically. Some challenges remain, including presenting continuous outcomes and technical/editorial implementation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20434023     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  51 in total

1.  Physicians' perception of alternative displays of clinical research evidence for clinical decision support - A study with case vignettes.

Authors:  Stacey L Slager; Charlene R Weir; Heejun Kim; Javed Mostafa; Guilherme Del Fiol
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 6.317

Review 2.  Cochrane Eyes and Vision: a perspective introducing Cochrane Corner in Eye.

Authors:  Jennifer Evans; Tianjing Li; Gianni Virgili; Richard Wormald
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2019-02-19       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  Identifying content to improve risk assessment communications within the Risk Profile: Literature reviews and focus groups with expert and non-expert stakeholders.

Authors:  C Ellermann; M McDowell; C O Schirren; A-K Lindemann; S Koch; M Lohmann; M A Jenny
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Building on evidence to improve patient care.

Authors:  Evelien Snauwaert; Johan VandeWalle; Evi V Nagler; Wim Van Biesen
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 3.714

5.  How much do you need: a randomised experiment of whether readers can understand the key messages from summaries of Cochrane Reviews without reading the full review.

Authors:  Lisa K Maguire; Mike Clarke
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2014-10-23       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider.

Authors:  Paula R Williamson; Douglas G Altman; Jane M Blazeby; Mike Clarke; Declan Devane; Elizabeth Gargon; Peter Tugwell
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-08-06       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review.

Authors:  Zhivko Zhelev; Ruth Garside; Christopher Hyde
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2013-05-16

8.  Development of two shortened systematic review formats for clinicians.

Authors:  Laure Perrier; Nav Persaud; Anita Ko; Monika Kastner; Jeremy Grimshaw; K Ann McKibbon; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Decision boxes for clinicians to support evidence-based practice and shared decision making: the user experience.

Authors:  Anik Giguere; France Légaré; Roland Grad; Pierre Pluye; R Brian Haynes; Michel Cauchon; François Rousseau; Juliana Alvarez Argote; Michel Labrecque
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2012-08-03       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Policymakers' and other stakeholders' perceptions of key considerations for health system decisions and the presentation of evidence to inform those considerations: an international survey.

Authors:  Joshua P Vogel; Andrew D Oxman; Claire Glenton; Sarah Rosenbaum; Simon Lewin; A Metin Gülmezoglu; João Paulo Souza
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2013-05-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.