Comparison between the standard and a new alternative format of the Summary-of-Findings tables in Cochrane review users: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, Nancy Santesso, Ignacio Neumann, Reem A Mustafa, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Itziar Etxeandia Ikobaltzeta, Catherine De Stio, Lauren J McCullagh, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Joerg J Meerpohl, Per Olav Vandvik, Jan L Brozek, Elie A Akl, Patrick Bossuyt, Rachel Churchill, Claire Glenton, Sarah Rosenbaum, Peter Tugwell, Vivian Welch, Gordon Guyatt, Holger Schünemann, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Romina Brignardello-Petersen, Nancy Santesso, Ignacio Neumann, Reem A Mustafa, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Itziar Etxeandia Ikobaltzeta, Catherine De Stio, Lauren J McCullagh, Pablo Alonso-Coello, Joerg J Meerpohl, Per Olav Vandvik, Jan L Brozek, Elie A Akl, Patrick Bossuyt, Rachel Churchill, Claire Glenton, Sarah Rosenbaum, Peter Tugwell, Vivian Welch, Gordon Guyatt, Holger Schünemann

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews represent one of the most important tools for knowledge translation but users often struggle with understanding and interpreting their results. GRADE Summary-of-Findings tables have been developed to display results of systematic reviews in a concise and transparent manner. The current format of the Summary-of-Findings tables for presenting risks and quality of evidence improves understanding and assists users with finding key information from the systematic review. However, it has been suggested that additional methods to present risks and display results in the Summary-of-Findings tables are needed.

Methods/design: We will conduct a non-inferiority parallel-armed randomized controlled trial to determine whether an alternative format to present risks and display Summary-of-Findings tables is not inferior compared to the current standard format. We will measure participant understanding, accessibility of the information, satisfaction, and preference for both formats. We will invite systematic review users to participate (that is clinicians, guideline developers, and researchers). The data collection process will be undertaken using the online 'Survey Monkey' system. For the primary outcome understanding, non-inferiority of the alternative format (Table A) to the current standard format (Table C) of Summary-of-Findings tables will be claimed if the upper limit of a 1-sided 95% confidence interval (for the difference of proportion of participants answering correctly a given question) excluded a difference in favor of the current format of more than 10%.

Discussion: This study represents an effort to provide systematic reviewers with additional options to display review results using Summary-of-Findings tables. In this way, review authors will have a variety of methods to present risks and more flexibility to choose the most appropriate table features to display (that is optional columns, risks expressions, complementary methods to display continuous outcomes, and so on).

Trials registration: NCT02022631 (21 December 2013).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design and flow-chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Alternative Summary-of-Findings (SoF) table format (Table A).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Current Summary-of-Findings (SoF) table format (Table C).

References

    1. Sauerland S, Seiler CM. Role of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in evidence-based medicine. World J Surg. 2005;29(5):582–7. doi: 10.1007/s00268-005-7917-7.
    1. Moat KA, Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Rottingen JA, Barnighausen T. Twelve myths about systematic reviews for health system policymaking rebutted. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(1):44–50. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2012.011175.
    1. Mazur DJ, Hickam DH. Patients’ interpretations of probability terms. J Gen Intern Med. 1991;6(3):237–40. doi: 10.1007/BF02598968.
    1. Mazur DJ, Merz JF. How age, outcome severity, and scale influence general medicine clinic patients’ interpretations of verbal probability terms. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9(5):268–71. doi: 10.1007/BF02599654.
    1. Lipkus IM. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(5):696–713. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07307271.
    1. Akl EA, Oxman AD, Herrin J, Vist GE, Terrenato I, Sperati F, et al. Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; Issue 3. Article number:CD006776. doi:006710.001002/14651858.CD14006776.pub14651852.
    1. Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Jaeschke R, Vist GE, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1106–10. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Dellinger P, Schunemann H, Levy MM, Kunz R, et al. Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ. 2008;337:a744. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a744.
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924–6. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Schunemann HJ. What is 'quality of evidence' and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ. 2008;336(7651):995–8. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Jaeschke R, Helfand M, Liberati A, et al. Incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7654):1170–3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39504.506319.80.
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Vist GE, Liberati A, et al. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7652):1049–51. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Oxman AD. Summaries of findings in Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Collaboration Methods Group Newsl. 2004. pp. 8–9.
    1. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):383–94. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026.
    1. Akl EA, Maroun N, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Alonso-Coello P, Vist GE, et al. Symbols were superior to numbers for presenting strength of recommendations to health care consumers: a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(12):1298–305. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.011.
    1. Rosenbaum SE, Glenton C, Nylund HK, Oxman AD. User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful Summary of Findings tables for Cochrane reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(6):607–19. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.013.
    1. Rosenbaum SE, Glenton C, Oxman AD. Summary-of-findings tables in Cochrane reviews improved understanding and rapid retrieval of key information. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(6):620–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.014.
    1. Vandvik PO, Santesso N, Akl EA, You J, Mulla S, Spencer FA, et al. Formatting modifications in GRADE evidence profiles improved guideline panelists comprehension and accessibility to information. A randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(7):748–55. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.013.
    1. Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ, Evans SJ, Altman DG. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA. 2012;308(24):2594–604. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.87802.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e7586.
    1. Johnston BC, Goldenberg JZ, Vandvik PO, Sun X, Guyatt GH. Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; Issue 11. Article number: CD004827. doi:101002/14651858CD004827pub3.
    1. Hsieh FY, Bloch DA, Larsen MD. A simple method of sample size calculation for linear and logistic regression. Stat Med. 1998;17(14):1623–34. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980730)17:14<1623::AID-SIM871>;2-S.
    1. Harrell FE. Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York: Springer; 2001.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe