Literature DB >> 26791430

Improving GRADE evidence tables part 1: a randomized trial shows improved understanding of content in summary of findings tables with a new format.

Alonso Carrasco-Labra1, Romina Brignardello-Petersen2, Nancy Santesso3, Ignacio Neumann4, Reem A Mustafa5, Lawrence Mbuagbaw6, Itziar Etxeandia Ikobaltzeta7, Catherine De Stio8, Lauren J McCullagh8, Pablo Alonso-Coello9, Joerg J Meerpohl10, Per Olav Vandvik11, Jan L Brozek12, Elie A Akl13, Patrick Bossuyt14, Rachel Churchill15, Claire Glenton16, Sarah Rosenbaum16, Peter Tugwell17, Vivian Welch18, Paul Garner19, Gordon Guyatt12, Holger J Schünemann20.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The current format of summary of findings (SoFs) tables for presenting effect estimates and associated quality of evidence improve understanding and assist users finding key information in systematic reviews. Users of SoF tables have demanded alternative formats to express findings from systematic reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: We conducted a randomized controlled trial among systematic review users to compare the relative merits of a new format with the current formats of SoF tables regarding understanding, accessibility of information, satisfaction, and preference. Our primary goal was to show that the new format is not inferior to the current format.
RESULTS: Of 390 potentially eligible subjects, 290 were randomized. Of seven items testing understanding, three showed similar results, two showed small differences favoring the new format, and two (understanding risk difference and quality of the evidence associated with a treatment effect) showed large differences favoring the new format [63% (95% confidence interval {CI}: 55, 71) and 62% (95% CI: 52, 71) more correct answers, respectively]. Respondents rated information in the alternative format as more accessible overall and preferred the new format over the current format.
CONCLUSIONS: While providing at least similar levels of understanding for some items and increased understanding for others, users prefer the new format of SoF tables.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Evidence summaries; Evidence tables; Formatting; GRADE; GRADEpro; Guidelines; Summary of findings table; Systematic reviews; Understanding

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26791430     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.12.007

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


  22 in total

1.  The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation.

Authors:  Benoît Béchard; Joachim Kimmerle; Justin Lawarée; Pierre-Oliver Bédard; Sharon E Straus; Mathieu Ouimet
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  Botulinum toxin type A therapy for blepharospasm.

Authors:  Gonçalo S Duarte; Filipe B Rodrigues; Raquel E Marques; Mafalda Castelão; Joaquim Ferreira; Cristina Sampaio; Austen P Moore; João Costa
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-11-19

3.  Botulinum toxin type A versus anticholinergics for cervical dystonia.

Authors:  Filipe B Rodrigues; Gonçalo S Duarte; Mafalda Castelão; Raquel E Marques; Joaquim Ferreira; Cristina Sampaio; Austen P Moore; João Costa
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-04-14

4.  Botulinum toxin type A therapy for cervical dystonia.

Authors:  Filipe B Rodrigues; Gonçalo S Duarte; Raquel E Marques; Mafalda Castelão; Joaquim Ferreira; Cristina Sampaio; Austen P Moore; João Costa
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-11-12

Review 5.  The effectiveness of evidence summaries on health policymakers and health system managers use of evidence from systematic reviews: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jennifer Petkovic; Vivian Welch; Maria Helena Jacob; Manosila Yoganathan; Ana Patricia Ayala; Heather Cunningham; Peter Tugwell
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 7.327

6.  Two alternatives versus the standard Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) summary of findings (SoF) tables to improve understanding in the presentation of systematic review results: a three-arm, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  Juan José Yepes-Nuñez; Rebecca L Morgan; Lawrence Mbuagbaw; Alonso Carrasco-Labra; Stephanie Chang; Susanne Hempel; Paul Shekelle; Mark Helfand; Tejan Baldeh; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Multilayered and digitally structured presentation formats of trustworthy recommendations: a combined survey and randomised trial.

Authors:  Linn Brandt; Per Olav Vandvik; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Elie A Akl; Judith Thornton; David Rigau; Katie Adams; Paul O'Connor; Gordon Guyatt; Annette Kristiansen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Facilitating evidence uptake: development and user testing of a systematic review summary format to inform public health decision-making in German-speaking countries.

Authors:  Laura K Busert; Margot Mütsch; Christina Kien; Aline Flatz; Ursula Griebler; Manfred Wildner; Jan M Stratil; Eva A Rehfuess
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2018-07-09

9.  Are there benefits from using bone-borne maxillary expansion instead of tooth-borne maxillary expansion? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Marietta Krüsi; Theodore Eliades; Spyridon N Papageorgiou
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 2.750

10.  What effect does functional appliance treatment have on the temporomandibular joint? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Karma Shiba Kyburz; Theodore Eliades; Spyridon N Papageorgiou
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 2.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.