Comparison of blogshots with plain language summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews: a qualitative study and randomized trial.
Evidence-based medicine
Health communication
Medical decision making
Patient education
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 May 2020
25 May 2020
Historique:
received:
03
12
2019
accepted:
28
04
2020
entrez:
27
5
2020
pubmed:
27
5
2020
medline:
30
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cochrane, an organization dedicated to the production and dissemination of high-quality evidence on health, endeavors to reach consumers by developing appropriate summary formats of its systematic reviews. However, the optimal type of presentation of evidence to consumers is still unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate consumer preferences for different summary formats of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs), using both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Initially, we conducted three focus groups with medical students (n = 7), doctors (n = 4), and patients (n = 9) in 2017 to explore their health information search habits and preferences for CSR summary formats. Based on those findings, we conducted a randomized trial with medical students at the University of Split School of Medicine, Croatia, and with patients from three Dalmatian family practices to determine whether they prefer CSR blogshots (n = 115) or CSR plain language summaries (PLSs; n = 123). Participants in the focus groups favored brief and explicit CSR summary formats with fewer numbers. Although we found no difference in participants' preferences for a specific summary format in the overall sample, subgroup analysis showed that patients preferred blogshots over PLSs in comparison to medical students (P = 0.003, eta squared effect size η CSR summaries should be produced in a format that meets the expectations and needs of consumers. Use of blogshots as a summary format could enhance the dissemination of CSRs among patients. The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03542201. Registered on May 31st 2018.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cochrane, an organization dedicated to the production and dissemination of high-quality evidence on health, endeavors to reach consumers by developing appropriate summary formats of its systematic reviews. However, the optimal type of presentation of evidence to consumers is still unknown.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to investigate consumer preferences for different summary formats of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs), using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
METHODS
METHODS
Initially, we conducted three focus groups with medical students (n = 7), doctors (n = 4), and patients (n = 9) in 2017 to explore their health information search habits and preferences for CSR summary formats. Based on those findings, we conducted a randomized trial with medical students at the University of Split School of Medicine, Croatia, and with patients from three Dalmatian family practices to determine whether they prefer CSR blogshots (n = 115) or CSR plain language summaries (PLSs; n = 123).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Participants in the focus groups favored brief and explicit CSR summary formats with fewer numbers. Although we found no difference in participants' preferences for a specific summary format in the overall sample, subgroup analysis showed that patients preferred blogshots over PLSs in comparison to medical students (P = 0.003, eta squared effect size η
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
CSR summaries should be produced in a format that meets the expectations and needs of consumers. Use of blogshots as a summary format could enhance the dissemination of CSRs among patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03542201. Registered on May 31st 2018.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32450904
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04360-9
pii: 10.1186/s13063-020-04360-9
pmc: PMC7249676
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03542201']
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
426Subventions
Organisme : Hrvatska Zaklada za Znanost
ID : IP-2014-09-7672
Références
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Feb 12;20(2):e47
pubmed: 29434017
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 May 23;16:61
pubmed: 27216616
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:86-94
pubmed: 29269021
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 14;(4):CD000227
pubmed: 24729336
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan 28;(1):CD001431
pubmed: 24470076
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 01;(4):CD000083
pubmed: 25828903
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 29;(4):CD007768
pubmed: 24777444
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Dec 4;18(1):290
pubmed: 30514288
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 16;(6):CD011889
pubmed: 27306653
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Apr 5;19(1):75
pubmed: 30953453
Trials. 2019 Jun 6;20(1):329
pubmed: 31171041
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 29;(7):CD000084
pubmed: 26222245
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19;(3):CD004563
pubmed: 16856050
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Jan;99(1):36-43
pubmed: 26277826
Croat Med J. 2017 Aug 31;58(4):300-309
pubmed: 28857523
CMAJ. 2016 Jan 5;188(1):25-32
pubmed: 26504102
Med Decis Making. 2012 Nov-Dec;32(6):851-65
pubmed: 22635285
BMC Public Health. 2015 Oct 05;15:1017
pubmed: 26438148
J Gen Intern Med. 2019 Apr;34(4):544-551
pubmed: 30684202
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jun 15;(6):CD007092
pubmed: 21678364
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 14;10(10):e0140029
pubmed: 26466099
Lancet. 2017 Jul 22;390(10092):374-388
pubmed: 28539194
J Gen Intern Med. 2007 Dec;22(12):1656-60
pubmed: 17922170