Objectives To evaluate a new format of a summary, which presents research from synthesized evidence to patients and the public. Study Design and Setting We conducted a randomized controlled trial in 143 members of the public from five countries (Canada, Norway, Spain, Argentina, and Italy). Participants received either a new summary format (a plain language summary [PLS]) or the current format used in Cochrane systematic reviews. The new PLS presents information about the condition and intervention, a narrative summary of results, and a table of results with absolute numbers for effects of the intervention and quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Results With the new PLS, more participants understood the benefits and harms and quality of evidence (53% vs. 18%, P < 0.001); more answered each of the five questions correctly (P≤ 0.001 for four questions); and they answered more questions correctly, median 3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-4) vs. 1 (IQR: 0-1), P < 0.001). Better understanding was independent of education level. More participants found information in the new PLS reliable, easy to find, easy to understand, and presented in a way that helped make decisions. Overall, participants preferred the new PLS. Conclusion This new PLS format for patients and the public is a promising tool to translate evidence from synthesized research.

A summary to communicate evidence from systematic reviews to the public improved understanding and accessibility of information: a randomized controlled trial / N. Santesso, T. Rader, E.S. Nilsen, C. Glenton, S. Rosenbaum, A. Ciapponi, L. Moja, J.P. Pardo, Q. Zhou, H.J. Schünemann. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0895-4356. - 68:2(2015 Feb), pp. 182-190.

A summary to communicate evidence from systematic reviews to the public improved understanding and accessibility of information: a randomized controlled trial

L. Moja;
2015

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate a new format of a summary, which presents research from synthesized evidence to patients and the public. Study Design and Setting We conducted a randomized controlled trial in 143 members of the public from five countries (Canada, Norway, Spain, Argentina, and Italy). Participants received either a new summary format (a plain language summary [PLS]) or the current format used in Cochrane systematic reviews. The new PLS presents information about the condition and intervention, a narrative summary of results, and a table of results with absolute numbers for effects of the intervention and quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Results With the new PLS, more participants understood the benefits and harms and quality of evidence (53% vs. 18%, P < 0.001); more answered each of the five questions correctly (P≤ 0.001 for four questions); and they answered more questions correctly, median 3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-4) vs. 1 (IQR: 0-1), P < 0.001). Better understanding was independent of education level. More participants found information in the new PLS reliable, easy to find, easy to understand, and presented in a way that helped make decisions. Overall, participants preferred the new PLS. Conclusion This new PLS format for patients and the public is a promising tool to translate evidence from synthesized research.
Patient education as topic; Information dissemination; Communication; Review literature as topic; Consumer satisfaction; Comprehension
Settore MED/42 - Igiene Generale e Applicata
feb-2015
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Santesso RCT Communication 2015.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 2.12 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.12 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/273031
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 22
  • Scopus 46
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 41
social impact