Effects of an Evidence Service on Health System Policymakers' Use of Research Evidence

March 21, 2017 updated by: John Lavis, McMaster University
The investigators have developed an online database called 'Health Systems Evidence,' which contains synthesized research evidence and additional details about this evidence that can make it easier for health system policymakers to use the included research evidence. The investigators have also developed an e-mail alerting service that brings to the attention of health system policymakers any new additions to Health Systems Evidence. This study will evaluate whether a "full-serve" version of Health Systems Evidence increases the use of research evidence by policy analysts and advisors in the Ontario government as compared to a "self-serve" version. The "full-serve" version comprises: 1) access to Health Systems Evidence; 2) monthly e-mail alerts about new additions to Health Systems Evidence; and 3) access to full-text articles that are cited in Health Systems Evidence. The "self-serve" version only provides access to Health Systems Evidence. The investigators will also interview study participants to obtain feedback about Health Systems Evidence, including how helpful it was in their work, why it was helpful (or not helpful), what aspects were most and least helpful and why, and recommendations for improving it.

Study Overview

Status

Withdrawn

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Background Health system policymakers need timely access to synthesized research evidence to inform the policymaking process. No efforts to address this need have been evaluated using an experimental quantitative design. The investigators developed an evidence service that draws inputs from Health Systems Evidence, which is a database of policy relevant systematic reviews. The reviews have been: 1) categorized by topic and type of review; 2) coded by the last year searches for studies were conducted and by the countries in which included studies were conducted; 3) rated for quality; and 4) linked to available user-friendly summaries, scientific abstracts, and full-text reports. The goal is to evaluate whether a "full-serve" evidence service increases the use of synthesized research evidence by policy analysts and advisors in the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) as compared to a "self-serve" evidence service.

Methods/design: The investigators will conduct a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT), along with a follow-up qualitative process study in order to explore the findings in greater depth. For the RCT, all policy analysts and policy advisors (n=168) in a single division of the MOHLTC will be invited to participate. Using a stratified randomized design, participants will be randomized to receive either the "full-serve" evidence service (database access, monthly e-mail alerts, and full-text article availability) or the "self-serve" evidence service (database access only). The trial duration will be ten months (two-month baseline period, six-month intervention period, and two month cross-over period). The primary outcome will be the mean number of site visits/month/user between baseline and the end of the intervention period. The secondary outcome will be participants' intention to use research evidence. For the qualitative study, 15 participants from each trial arm (n=30) will be purposively sampled. One-on-one semi-structured interviews will be conducted by telephone on their views about and their experiences with the evidence service they received, how helpful it was in their work, why it was helpful (or not helpful), what aspects were most and least helpful and why, and recommendations for next steps.

Study Type

Interventional

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Ontario
      • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8S 4K1
        • McMaster Health Forum Impact Lab

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • All policy analysts and policy advisors from one purposively selected division of one Canadian provincial Ministry of Health.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Full-serve evidence service

The "full-serve" evidence service consists of:

  1. database (Health Systems Evidence) access;
  2. monthly e-mail alerts; and
  3. full-text article availability.
Health Systems Evidence (HSE) contains over 1400 research syntheses about governance, financial and delivery arrangements within health systems and about implementation strategies relevant to health systems. The syntheses have been: 1) categorized by topic, type of synthesis, and type of question addressed; 2) coded by the last year in which searches for studies were conducted and by the countries in which included studies were conducted; 3) rated for quality; and 4) linked to publicly available user-friendly summaries, scientific abstracts, and full-text reviews. We identified systematic reviews in HSE that are not accessible to study participants and developed a mechanism to reimburse publishers for full-text downloads of these reviews.
Active Comparator: Self-serve evidence service
Participants allocated to the "self-serve" evidence service will receive only database access, which is already publicly available at www.healthsystemsevidence.org
Health Systems Evidence (HSE) contains over 1400 research syntheses about governance, financial and delivery arrangements within health systems and about implementation strategies relevant to health systems. The syntheses have been: 1) categorized by topic, type of synthesis, and type of question addressed; 2) coded by the last year in which searches for studies were conducted and by the countries in which included studies were conducted; 3) rated for quality; and 4) linked to publicly available user-friendly summaries, scientific abstracts, and full-text reviews. We identified systematic reviews in HSE that are not accessible to study participants and developed a mechanism to reimburse publishers for full-text downloads of these reviews.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
number of logins/month/participant
Time Frame: 10 months
The investigators will track utilization of the evidence service by calculating the mean number of logins/month/participant
10 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Intention to use research evidence
Time Frame: Baseline and follow-up (after delivery of 6-month intervention)
The investigators will use the theory of planned behaviour to measure participants' intention to use research evidence. Using a manual designed to construct measures based on the theory, colleagues have developed and sought preliminary feedback on a data-collection instrument by first assessing face validity through interviews with key informants and then pilot testing it with 28 policymakers and researchers who completed it after participating in a knowledge translation intervention. In addition, colleagues found the data-collection instrument to have moderate test-retest reliability.
Baseline and follow-up (after delivery of 6-month intervention)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: John N Lavis, MD, PhD, McMaster University

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

December 1, 2010

Primary Completion (Actual)

April 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2013

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 28, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 1, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

March 2, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 23, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 21, 2017

Last Verified

March 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • HHS/FHS REB 10-267

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

Not applicable - trial was terminated due to insufficient enrollment and no data was collected.

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Use of Research Evidence

Clinical Trials on Health Systems Evidence

3
Subscribe