1
|
Matas J, Tokalić R, García-Costa D, López-Iñesta E, Álvarez-García E, Grimaldo F, Marušić A. Tool to assess recognition and understanding of elements in Summary of Findings Table for health evidence synthesis: a cross-sectional study. Sci Rep 2023; 13:18044. [PMID: 37872203 PMCID: PMC10593927 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-45359-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2023] [Accepted: 10/18/2023] [Indexed: 10/25/2023] Open
Abstract
of Findings (SoF) tables concisely present the main findings of evidence synthesis of health evidence, but how users navigate it to understand and interpret the presented information is not clear. We quantified the interaction of medical students with an SoF table while answering a knowledge quiz. Read&Learn tool was used to measure the number of target and non-target table cells visited for each question and the time spent on these cells. Students positively identified target elements for quiz questions and answered simpler questions, but struggled with critical thinking and understanding study outcomes. The question on outcomes with the largest improvement post-intervention had the fewest correct answers, the longest interaction with table cells and the most opened cells before answering. Students spent a median of 72% of the time reading target table cells. A heatmap of the interactions showed that they were mostly answer-oriented. Further development of the tool and metrics is needed to use the tool and the metrics to study the cognitive processes during the assessment of health evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jakov Matas
- Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21000, Split, Croatia
| | - Ružica Tokalić
- Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21000, Split, Croatia
| | | | - Emilia López-Iñesta
- Department of Didactics of Mathematics, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain
| | | | | | - Ana Marušić
- Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21000, Split, Croatia.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Morgan RL, Yepes-Nuñez JJ, Ewusie J, Mbuagbaw L, Chang S, Baldeh T, Hempel S, Helfand M, Shekelle P, Wilt TJ, Schünemann HJ. Improving grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation evidence tables part 4: a three-arm noninferiority randomized trial demonstrates improved understanding of content in summary of findings tables with a new format. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 154:125-135. [PMID: 36503004 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.12.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2022] [Revised: 11/15/2022] [Accepted: 12/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate alternative formats of summary of findings (SoF) tables for single comparison with multiple outcomes. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We conducted a three-arm randomized controlled noninferiority trial (RCT) in the following systematic review (SR) users: researchers, clinical practice guideline developers, health care providers, policymakers, and knowledge transfer organizations to measure understanding, accessibility, satisfaction, and preference across the current grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) SoF, an alternative GRADE SoF, or an adapted evidence-based practice center (EPC) program SoF table. RESULTS One Hundred Seventy-Nine participants were randomized, and 129 participants completed the RCT (n = 47 current GRADE, n = 41 alternative GRADE, n = 41 adapted EPC). Understanding the certainty of evidence and treatment effect was comparable across groups. The adapted EPC SoF table was inferior for quantifying risk and RD compared to the alternatives (<35% correct vs. >85% correct). Participants reported increased satisfaction when SoF tables presented number needed to treat (NNT), anticipated absolute effect differences, and narrative syntheses for evidence that could not be meta-analyzed. Participants reported accessibility to information as significantly better in both GRADE SoF tables, when compared with the adapted EPC SoF table. Participants preferred the alternative GRADE SoF table format. CONCLUSION The alternative GRADE SoF table is a promising format for SR users preferring a comprehensive presentation of SR results for single comparisons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca L Morgan
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Juan José Yepes-Nuñez
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; School of Medicine, Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Joycelyne Ewusie
- Biostatistics Unit, Father Sean O'Sullivan Research Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lawrence Mbuagbaw
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Biostatistics Unit, Father Sean O'Sullivan Research Centre, St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Tejan Baldeh
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Susanne Hempel
- Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Mark Helfand
- VA Portland Health Care System and Department of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Paul Shekelle
- Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Timothy J Wilt
- Minneapolis VA, Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, University of Minnesota Schools of Medicine Public Health, Division of Health Policy and Management, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Holger J Schünemann
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Via Rita Levi Montalcini 4, 20090 Milano, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tokalić R, Poklepović Peričić T, Marusic A. Similar outcomes of online and face to face training of GRADE approach for certainty of evidence: a randomized study (Preprint). J Med Internet Res 2022. [DOI: 10.2196/43928] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/16/2023] Open
|
4
|
Matthews M, Lotfi T, Santesso N, Loeb M, Mertz D, Chagla Z, Hajizadeh A, Piggott T, Dietl B, Schünemann HJ. Comparing the usability of the World Health Organization's conventional tuberculosis guidelines to the eTB recommendations map: A two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial. PLOS GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 2:e0001166. [PMID: 36962671 PMCID: PMC10021182 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001166] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 09/19/2022] [Indexed: 03/26/2023]
Abstract
Best practices for the dissemination of global health guidelines has not undergone rigorous research. We used a new approach to digitizing World Health Organization (WHO) global tuberculosis guideline recommendations (eTB RecMap) and compared its usability to the conventional method of accessing TB recommendations using the WHO website. We conducted a two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial using a survey among global stakeholders who were past or planned future users of TB guidelines, recommendations, or policy advice. We assigned participants randomly (1:1) to complete an activity using the WHO eTB RecMap or the conventional website. The primary outcome was the accessibility of information and secondary outcomes understanding, satisfaction, and preference for one of the two formats. Between February 26 and August 29, 2021, we received 478 responses from stakeholders, of whom 244 (122 per group) were eligible and provided analysable results. Participants rated the eTB RecMap as more accessible, on average, when compared to the conventional website (on a seven-point scale, the mean difference {MD} was 0.9; 95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.6, 1.2; p < 0.001) and were more likely to correctly answer understanding questions. This is the first trial comparing digitized dissemination formats of health guideline recommendations. Stakeholders rated the WHO eTB RecMap as more accessible than the conventional WHO website for the tested recommendations. They also understood presented information better. The findings support better usability of TB information through the eTB RecMap and contribute to the effort to end the TB epidemic. Trial registration: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04745897) on February 9, 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Micayla Matthews
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- McMaster University Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and GRADE Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Tamara Lotfi
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- McMaster University Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and GRADE Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nancy Santesso
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- McMaster University Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and GRADE Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mark Loeb
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- McMaster University Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and GRADE Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Dominik Mertz
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zain Chagla
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anisa Hajizadeh
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Primary Care, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Thomas Piggott
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Bart Dietl
- Evidence Prime Incorporated, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Holger J Schünemann
- McMaster University Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- McMaster University Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada and GRADE Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milano, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Barker TH, Dias M, Stern C, Porritt K, Wiechula R, Aromataris E, Brennan S, Schünemann HJ, Munn Z. Guidelines rarely used GRADE and applied methods inconsistently: A methodological study of Australian guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 2020; 130:125-134. [PMID: 33130237 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2020] [Revised: 10/20/2020] [Accepted: 10/28/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach is accepted methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence included in systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines. The GRADE approach is endorsed globally, in Australia, the National Health and Medical Research Council advocated for the use of the GRADE approach in 2011. The purpose of this methodological review was to assess how GRADE has been adopted for Australian practice guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING This methodological review searched of the National Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Practice Guidelines Portal from 2011 to 2018, in an effort to retrieve all practice guidelines available via this medium. RESULTS 240 guidelines were retrieved authored by 51 different organizations. 15 guidelines followed GRADE methodology. Application of GRADE methods varied between guidelines, some misreported and altered aspects of the GRADE process. Guidelines that closely adhered to the guidance from the GRADE Working Group scored higher in domain 3 (rigor of development) of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool, indicating a positive linear relationship between GRADE adherence and rigor of development scores. CONCLUSION The results of our project suggest that the use of GRADE in Australian guidelines is increasing, however, strategies to increase uptake and reporting within the guideline community need to be explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy Hugh Barker
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia.
| | - Mafalda Dias
- Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia; Quality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Cindy Stern
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Kylie Porritt
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Rick Wiechula
- Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia; Adelaide Nursing School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Centre for Evidence-based Practice South Australia: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Edoardo Aromataris
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Sue Brennan
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3004, Australia; Melbourne GRADE Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Holger J Schünemann
- Michael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada Centre, Canada; McMaster GRADE Centre, Hamilton, Canada; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Zachary Munn
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Adelaide GRADE Centre, Adelaide, Australia
| |
Collapse
|