Review and Assessment of Network Meta-analyses for Knowledge Uptake (RANK) Study
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 撤回
- 主要终点
- Proportion of participants who appropriately define the clinical "bottom line." Participants' answers will be independently evaluated by two investigators for agreement with an expert panel's recommendation.
研究概览
简要总结
This randomized controlled trial will assess the interpretability of the rank-heat plot for presenting the results of network meta-analysis in comparison to SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) plots which are suggested to present one of the best ranking statistics.
详细描述
Clinicians are responsible for making decisions to improve health outcomes. When available, clinicians should use the results of a knowledge synthesis, such as systematic reviews and meta-analyses, to inform decision-making. Pairwise meta-analyses are limited, however, by the availability of RCTs that directly compare interventions. This is troublesome for knowledge users who require results from comparisons of multiple interventions to inform decision-making. To address this concern, the use of network meta-analyses (NMAs) is increasing in healthcare the literature. NMAs are a useful tool because they can summarize results from numerous studies and interventions. It is unclear how NMA results should be presented to increase the likelihood of clinicians understanding and using the results to improve health outcomes. Thus, a randomized controlled trial of NMA plots will be conducted. Participants will be randomized to either the rank-heat plot (intervention) or SUCRA plots (control) that present the same NMA results of a study that explored the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions for falls prevention. Outcomes will be ascertained via an online survey. The RCT will take place in an online environment and will require each participant to partake in a single session. This study will help guide best practices for the presentation of reviews to improve the uptake and use of NMA.
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Health Services Research
- 盲法
- Single (Outcomes Assessor)
盲法说明
Single blind (outcome assessor)
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- •Clinicians must be accredited to practice in Canada and working (full- or part-time) as a family physician or general internist.
排除标准
- •Unable to read and understand English;
- •No access to the internet;
- •Read, co-authored or peer-reviewed the study: "Quality Improvement strategies to Prevent Falls in the Elderly: A systematic review and network meta-analysis" (manuscript in preparation).
研究组 & 干预措施
Rank-Heat Plot
The intervention group will receive an online survey to evaluate their interpretation of the results from the NMA with a rank-heat plot including results from 2 outcomes that were selected by our knowledge users (#injurious falls, #fractures).
干预措施: Rank-Heat Plot (Other)
SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) Plot
The control group will receive an online survey to evaluate their interpretation of the results from the NMA with the SUCRA plots including results from the same 2 outcomes that will be presented to the intervention group (i.e., #injurious falls, #fractures).
干预措施: SUCRA Plot (Other)
结局指标
主要结局
Proportion of participants who appropriately define the clinical "bottom line." Participants' answers will be independently evaluated by two investigators for agreement with an expert panel's recommendation.
时间窗: during experiment via single session, <1 hour survey
次要结局
- Proportion of participants who accurately apply the evidence to the provided clinical scenario.(during experiment via single session, <1 hour survey)
- Completeness of survey data evaluated by two independent investigators(Immediate post-experiment)
- Time taken to complete survey(Immediate post-experiment)
