Comparison of blogshots with plain language summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews: a qualitative study and randomized trial

被引:11
|
作者
Buljan, Ivan [1 ,2 ]
Tokalic, Ruzica [1 ,2 ]
Roguljic, Marija [3 ]
Zakarija-Grkovic, Irena [1 ,2 ]
Vrdoljak, Davorka [4 ]
Milic, Petra [5 ]
Puljak, Livia [2 ]
Marusic, Ana [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Split, Dept Res Biomed & Hlth, Sch Med, Soltanska 2, Split 21000, Croatia
[2] Catholic Univ Croatia, Ctr Evidence Based Med & Hlth Care, Split, Croatia
[3] Univ Split, Dept Oral Dis & Periodontol, Sch Med, Split, Croatia
[4] Univ Split, Dept Family Med, Sch Med, Split, Croatia
[5] Univ Split, Sch Med, Split, Croatia
关键词
Patient education; Medical decision making; Health communication; Evidence-based medicine; INFORMATION;
D O I
10.1186/s13063-020-04360-9
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
BackgroundCochrane, 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.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate consumer preferences for different summary formats of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs), using both qualitative and quantitative approaches.MethodsInitially, 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).ResultsParticipants 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 eta (2)=0.04).ConclusionCSR 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 registrationThe trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03542201. Registered on May 31st 2018.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in assisted reproductive technologies
    Windsor, B.
    Popovich, I.
    Jordan, V.
    Showell, M.
    Shea, B.
    Farquhar, C.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2012, 27 (12) : 3460 - 3466
  • [22] Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
    Tari Turner
    Sally Green
    David Tovey
    Steve McDonald
    Karla Soares-Weiser
    Charlotte Pestridge
    Julian Elliott
    Systematic Reviews, 6
  • [23] Summaries of Nursing Rare-Related Systematic Reviews from the Cochrane Library Benzodiazepines for delirium
    Norrie, Peter
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED HEALTHCARE, 2010, 8 (02): : 103 - 104
  • [24] Summaries of Nursing Care-Related Systematic Reviews From the Cochrane Library β-blockers for Hypertension
    Barrett, David
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR NURSING, 2013, 28 (06) : 563 - 564
  • [25] Plain language summaries: A systematic review of theory, guidelines and empirical research
    Stoll, Marlene
    Kerwer, Martin
    Lieb, Klaus
    Chasiotis, Anita
    PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (06):
  • [26] Statistical Multiplicity in Systematic Reviews of Anaesthesia Interventions: A Quantification and Comparison between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Reviews
    Imberger, Georgina
    Vejlby, Alexandra Damgaard
    Hansen, Sara Bohnstedt
    Moller, Ann M.
    Wetterslev, Jorn
    PLOS ONE, 2011, 6 (12):
  • [27] Producing Cochrane systematic reviews-a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement
    Turner, Tari
    Green, Sally
    Tovey, David
    McDonald, Steve
    Soares-Weiser, Karla
    Pestridge, Charlotte
    Elliott, Julian
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, 6
  • [28] Cochrane reviews in pregnancy: The role of perinatal randomized trials and systematic reviews in establishing evidence
    Dodd, JM
    Crowther, CA
    SEMINARS IN FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2006, 11 (02): : 97 - 103
  • [29] Inequities in glaucoma research: an analysis of Cochrane systematic reviews and randomized trials
    Bondok, Mostafa
    Dewidar, Omar
    Al-Ani, Abdullah
    Selvakumar, Rishika
    Ing, Edsel
    Ramke, Jacqueline
    El-Hadad, Christian
    Damji, Karim F.
    Li, Tianjing
    Welch, Vivian
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2025, 181
  • [30] Comparison of information sources used in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews: A case study in the field of anesthesiology and pain
    Biocic, Marina
    Fidahic, Mahir
    Cikes, Karla
    Puljak, Livia
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2019, 10 (04) : 597 - 605