Show simple item record

Authordc.contributor.authorCarrasco Labra, Alonso 
Authordc.contributor.authorBrignardello Petersen, Romina 
Authordc.contributor.authorSantesso, Nancy 
Authordc.contributor.authorNeumann, Ignacio 
Authordc.contributor.authorMustafa, Reem 
Authordc.contributor.authorMbuagbaw, Lawrence 
Authordc.contributor.authorEtxeandia Ikobaltzeta, Itziar 
Authordc.contributor.authorDe Stio, Catherine 
Authordc.contributor.authorMcCullagh, Lauren 
Authordc.contributor.authorAlonso Coello, Pablo 
Authordc.contributor.authorMeerpohl, Joerg 
Authordc.contributor.authorVandvik, Per 
Authordc.contributor.authorBrozek, Jan 
Authordc.contributor.authorAkl, Elie 
Authordc.contributor.authorBossuyt, Patrick 
Authordc.contributor.authorChurchill, Rachel 
Authordc.contributor.authorGlenton, Claire 
Authordc.contributor.authorRosenbaum, Sarah 
Authordc.contributor.authorTugwell, Peter 
Authordc.contributor.authorWelch, Vivian 
Authordc.contributor.authorGarner, Paul 
Authordc.contributor.authorGuyatt, Gordon H. 
Authordc.contributor.authorSch€unemann, Holger 
Cita de ítemdc.identifier.citationJournal of Clinical Epidemiology 74 (2016) 7-18es_ES
Abstractdc.description.abstractObjectives: The current format of summary of findings (SoFs) tables for presenting effect estimates and associated quality of evidence improve understanding and assist users finding key information in systematic reviews. Users of SoF tables have demanded alternative formats to express findings from systematic reviews. Study Design and Setting: We conducted a randomized controlled trial among systematic review users to compare the relative merits of a new format with the current formats of SoF tables regarding understanding, accessibility of information, satisfaction, and preference. Our primary goal was to show that the new format is not inferior to the current format. Results: Of 390 potentially eligible subjects, 290 were randomized. Of seven items testing understanding, three showed similar results, two showed small differences favoring the new format, and two (understanding risk difference and quality of the evidence associated with a treatment effect) showed large differences favoring the new format [63% (95% confidence interval {CU}: 55, 71) and 62% (95% CI: 52, 71) more correct answers, respectively]. Respondents rated information in the alternative format as more accessible overall and preferred the new format over the current format. Conclusions: While providing at least similar levels of understanding for some items and increased understanding for others, users prefer the new format of SoF tables. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reservedes_ES
Patrocinadordc.description.sponsorshipCochrane Methods Innovation Fund GRADE Center at McMaster Universityes_ES
Type of licensedc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile*
Link to Licensedc.rights.uri*
Sourcedc.sourceJournal of Clinical Epidemiologyes_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectSummary of findings tablees_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectEvidence summarieses_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectEvidence tableses_ES
Keywordsdc.subjectSystematic reviewses_ES
Títulodc.titleImproving GRADE evidence tables part 1: a randomized trial shows improved understanding of content in summary of findings tables with a new formates_ES
Document typedc.typeArtículo de revistaes_ES
Indexationuchile.indexArtículo de publicación ISIes_ES

Files in this item


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile