Browsing by Author "Welch, Vivian."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    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
    (2015) Neumann Burotto, Gonzalo Ignacio; Carrasco Labra, Alonso.; Brignardello Petersen, Romina.; Santesso, Nancy.; Mustafa, Reem A.; Mbuagbaw, Lawrence.; Ikobaltzeta, Itziar E.; De Stio, Catherine.; McCullagh, Lauren J.; Alonso Coello, Pablo.; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Vandvik, Per O.; Brozek, Jan L.; Akl, Elie A.; Bossuyt, Patrick.; Churchill, Rachel.; Glenton, Claire.; Rosenbaum, Sarah.; Tugwell, Peter.; Welch, Vivian.; Guyatt, Gordon.; Schünemann, Holger.
    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)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)
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Protocol for the development of a CONSORT-equity guideline to improve reporting of health equity in randomized trials
    (2015) Welch, Vivian.; Jull, J.; Petkovic, J.; Armstrong, R.; Boyer, Y.; Cuervo, L. G.; Edwards, S. J. L.; Lydiatt, A.; Gough, D.; Pantoja Calderón, Tomás; Grimshaw, J.; Kristjansson, E.; Mbuagbaw, L.; McGowan, J.; Moher, D.; Petticrew, M.; Pottie, K.; Rader, T.; Shea, B.; Taljaard, M.; Waters, E.; Weijer, C.; Wells, G. A.; White, H.; Whitehead, M.; Tugwell, P.
    Abstract Background Health equity concerns the absence of avoidable and unfair differences in health. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide evidence about the impact of an intervention on health equity for specific disadvantaged populations or in general populations; this is important for equity-focused decision-making. Previous work has identified a lack of adequate reporting guidelines for assessing health equity in RCTs. The objective of this study is to develop guidelines to improve the reporting of health equity considerations in RCTs, as an extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). Methods/design A six-phase study using integrated knowledge translation governed by a study executive and advisory board will assemble empirical evidence to inform the CONSORT-equity extension. To create the guideline, the following steps are proposed: (1) develop a conceptual framework for identifying “equity-relevant trials,” (2) assess empirical evidence regarding reporting of equity-relevant trials, (3) consult with global methods and content experts on how to improve reporting of health equity in RCTs, (4) collect broad feedback and prioritize items needed to improve reporting of health equity in RCTs, (5) establish consensus on the CONSORT-equity extension: the guideline for equity-relevant trials, and (6) broadly disseminate and implement the CONSORT-equity extension. Discussion This work will be relevant to a broad range of RCTs addressing questions of effectiveness for strategies to improve practice and policy in the areas of social determinants of health, clinical care, health systems, public health, and international development, where health and/or access to health care is a primary outcome. The outcomes include a reporting guideline (CONSORT-equity extension) for equity-relevant RCTs and a knowledge translation strategy to broadly encourage its uptake and use by journal editors, authors, and funding agencies.