Clinical trial NCT03041454: Testing New Formats for the Presentation of Research Evidence to Health Care Managers and Policy Makers
Official title: A Randomized Trial to Compare the Effects of a Novel Versus Traditional Systematic Review Format on the Ability of Health Care Managers and Policy Makers to Understand and Apply Evidence
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Uptake of Systematic Review Evidence
Lead sponsor: Unity Health Toronto
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2017-02-02
Enrollment: 257
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

Brief summary: The purpose of this project is to identify and use our knowledge on the barriers and facilitators to using systematic reviews (SR) by health care managers (HCM) and policy markers (PM) to develop and test a novel format for presentation of SR for HCM and PM. We will invite HCM and PM from hospitals and regional authorities in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia to participate in a randomized-control trial. Participants will receive a link to an online consent survey, and then be randomly allocated to receive access to a novel SR or its traditional presentation. There is no time limit to completing the task, and participants are able to save their responses and finish later. Participants are able to withdraw from the study by not completing the task.

Detailed description: Despite advances in the conduct and reporting of traditional systematic reviews, current evidence suggests that they are used infrequently by health care managers and policy makers in decision making. Managers and policy makers have suggested that concise presentation positively affects the use of systematic reviews. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to assess the impact of a traditional systematic review format compared with the innovative format on the ability of health care managers and policy makers to understand the evidence in the review and apply it to a relevant health care decision making scenario.

The two end-user groups have different formatting needs and we will therefore run 2 parallel studies, randomizing each group separately. Once participants have consented to participate, a computer generated randomization process will allocate them to one of 2 arms (1:1 ratio). Participants will either receive either a traditional format or a novel format. Unequal block randomization will be used and allocation will be concealed through central assignment. Outcomes assessors will be blinded and participants will be blinded to the citation of the review so that the traditional version will not be easily accessible in its original format from the relevant journal.

This study will be the first study to engage health care managers and policy makers in the testing of formats for presentation of research evidence relevant to their needs. The results of the project will help increase the uptake of systematic review results in health care management policy decision-making, ultimately leading to informed decision making and positively impacting the health of Canadians.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Health care managers from the Alberta SCNs, CAHO in Ontario, the RHAs and AQESSS in Quebec and RHAs from BC will be invited to participate.
* Policy makers/analysts from the Ontario, BC, Alberta and Quebec Ministries of Health

Exclusion Criteria:

* Health care managers or policy makers who are unwilling or unable to give informed consent.

Primary outcomes:
measure: Proportion of participants (health care managers or policy makers) who appropriately consider and apply the evidence from each systematic review format
timeFrame: This measure will be assessed at the particular time the intervention is administered (i.e., at the time the participant reads the systematic review format, an average of 2 hours).
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Comprehension of the review
timeFrame: This measures will be assessed at the particular time the intervention is administered (i.e., at the time the participant reads the systematic review format, an average of 2 hours).
measure: Intention to use evidence
timeFrame: This measures will be assessed at the particular time the intervention is administered (i.e., at the time the participant reads the systematic review format, an average of 2 hours).
measure: Perceived tentativeness of research findings
timeFrame: This measures will be assessed at the particular time the intervention is administered (i.e., at the time the participant reads the systematic review format, an average of 2 hours).
measure: Provisional opinion about the intervention
timeFrame: This measures will be assessed at the particular time the intervention is administered (i.e., at the time the participant reads the systematic review format, an average of 2 hours).
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Toronto
country: Canada
facility: St. Michael's Hospital
state: Ontario
Study officials:
affiliation: Unity Health Toronto
name: Sharon e Straus
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References: