dc.creatorCarrasco Labra, Alonso
dc.creatorBrignardello Petersen, Romina
dc.creatorSantesso, Nancy
dc.creatorNeumann, Ignacio
dc.creatorMustafa, Reem
dc.creatorMbuagbaw, Lawrence
dc.creatorEtxeandia Ikobaltzeta, Itziar
dc.creatorDe Stio, Catherine
dc.creatorMcCullagh, Lauren
dc.creatorAlonso Coello, Pablo
dc.creatorMeerpohl, Joerg
dc.creatorVandvik, Per
dc.creatorBrozek, Jan
dc.creatorAkl, Elie
dc.creatorBossuyt, Patrick
dc.creatorChurchill, Rachel
dc.creatorGlenton, Claire
dc.creatorRosenbaum, Sarah
dc.creatorTugwell, Peter
dc.creatorWelch, Vivian
dc.creatorGarner, Paul
dc.creatorGuyatt, Gordon H.
dc.creatorSch€unemann, Holger
dc.date.accessioned2016-12-06T18:56:19Z
dc.date.available2016-12-06T18:56:19Z
dc.date.created2016-12-06T18:56:19Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifierJournal of Clinical Epidemiology 74 (2016) 7-18
dc.identifier10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.12.007
dc.identifierhttps://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/141692
dc.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 reserved
dc.languageen
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/cl/
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Chile
dc.sourceJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
dc.subjectSummary of findings table
dc.subjectGRADE
dc.subjectEvidence summaries
dc.subjectUnderstanding
dc.subjectFormatting
dc.subjectGRADEpro
dc.subjectEvidence tables
dc.subjectSystematic reviews
dc.subjectGuidelines
dc.titleImproving GRADE evidence tables part 1: a randomized trial shows improved understanding of content in summary of findings tables with a new format
dc.typeArtículo de revista


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución