Interactive versus static decision support tools for COVID-19

Not Applicable

• Conditions: U07.2; Suspected COVID-19; COVID-19, virus not identified

• Registration Number: DRKS00028136
• Lead Sponsor: Charité Campus Charité Mitte

Brief Summary

Not available

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study Completion: 2020-11-29
• Study Start: 2022-02-22
• Last Update Posted: 19 August 2024

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: Complete
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 196

Inclusion Criteria

US residents

Exclusion Criteria

Professional medical background (ie nurses, paramedics, physicians etc.)

Study & Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Study Design: Not specified

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Decision accuracy (number of fictitious clinical vignettes correctly appraised by the participants; minimum 0, maximum 14)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
1) Participants’ decisional (un)certainty was assessed using O'Connor's (1995) Decisional Conflict Subscale following the appraisal of all seven fictitious vignettes.<br>2) Participants mental effort on appraising the vignettes was assessed after assessment of each vignette using the Cognitive Load Measurement instrument presented by Paas et al. (2003).<br><br>For participants in the intervention group we additionally surveyed<br><br>3) perceived usefulness of the decision aids using a scale from Davis' Technology Acceptance Model (1989),<br><br>4) ease of use of the decision aids using a scale scales from Davis' Technology Acceptance Model (1989),<br><br>5) self-reported trust in the decision aid's recommendations using a custom 7-point Likert scale,<br><br>6) self-reported future intention to use the decision aid (again) using a a custom 7-point Likert scale,<br><br>after appraisal of all seven case vignettes.