Display options
Cite
Perrier L, Persaud N, Thorpe KE, et al. Using a systematic review in clinical decision making: a pilot parallel, randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2015;10:118doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4.
Perrier, L., Persaud, N., Thorpe, K. E., & Straus, S. E. (2015). Using a systematic review in clinical decision making: a pilot parallel, randomized controlled trial. Implementation science : IS, 10118. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4
Perrier, Laure, et al. "Using a systematic review in clinical decision making: a pilot parallel, randomized controlled trial." Implementation science : IS vol. 10 (2015): 118. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4
Perrier L, Persaud N, Thorpe KE, Straus SE. Using a systematic review in clinical decision making: a pilot parallel, randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2015 Aug 15;10:118. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4. PMID: 26276278; PMCID: PMC4542122.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Implement Sci. 2015 Aug 15;10:118. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4.

Using a systematic review in clinical decision making: a pilot parallel, randomized controlled trial.

Implementation science : IS

Laure Perrier, Nav Persaud, Kevin E Thorpe, Sharon E Straus

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Health Management, Policy and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada. [email protected].
  2. Department of Family and Community Medicine, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Canada. [email protected].
  3. Dalla Lana, School of Public Health, Applied Health Research Centre, Keenan Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Canada. [email protected].
  4. Faculty of Medicine, Keenan Research Centre, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, Canada. [email protected].

PMID: 26276278 PMCID: PMC4542122 DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that systematic reviews are used infrequently by physicians in clinical decision-making. One proposed solution is to create filtered resources so that information is validated and refined in order to be read quickly. Two shortened systematic review formats were developed to enhance their use in clinical decision-making.

METHODS: To prepare for a full-scale trial, we conducted a pilot study to test methods and procedures in order to refine the processes. A recruitment email was sent to physicians practicing full- or part-time in family medicine or general internal medicine. The pilot study took place in an online environment and eligible physicians were randomized to one of the systematic review formats (shortened or full-length) and instructed to read the document. Participants were asked to provide the clinical bottom line and apply the information presented to a clinical scenario. Participants' answers were evaluated independently by two investigators against "gold standard" answers prepared by an expert panel.

RESULTS: Fifty-six clinicians completed the pilot study within a 2-month period with a response rate of 4.3 %. Agreement between investigators in assessing participants' answers was determined by calculating a kappa statistic. Two questions were assessed separately, and a kappa statistic was calculated at 1.00 (100 % agreement) for each.

CONCLUSIONS: Agreement between investigators in assessing participants' answers is satisfactory. Although recruitment for the pilot study was completed in a reasonable time-frame, response rates were low and will require large numbers of contacts. The results indicate that conducting a full-scale trial is feasible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02414360 .

References

  1. Eur J Public Health. 2009 Jun;19(3):297-302 - PubMed
  2. BMJ Open. 2014;4(12):e005919 - PubMed
  3. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:1 - PubMed
  4. BMJ. 2000 Sep 16;321(7262):694-6 - PubMed
  5. Med J Malaysia. 2000 Dec;55(4):486-92 - PubMed
  6. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2001 Sep;91(8):437-42 - PubMed
  7. Can J Gastroenterol. 2002 Jan;16(1):17-21 - PubMed
  8. BMJ. 2002 Mar 23;324(7339):710 - PubMed
  9. J Med Libr Assoc. 2002 Jul;90(3):298-304 - PubMed
  10. Pediatrics. 2004 Jan;113(1 Pt 1):64-9 - PubMed
  11. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005 Mar-Apr;12(2):217-24 - PubMed
  12. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005 Apr;93(2):206-12 - PubMed
  13. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Jan;94(1):55-60 - PubMed
  14. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Aug 21;147(4):273-4 - PubMed
  15. Eval Health Prof. 2007 Dec;30(4):303-21 - PubMed
  16. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655 - PubMed
  17. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Jun;63(6):607-19 - PubMed
  18. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Jun;63(6):620-6 - PubMed
  19. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Apr;26(4):419-26 - PubMed
  20. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Dec;65(12):1289-95 - PubMed
  21. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Feb;66(2):197-201 - PubMed
  22. Implement Sci. 2013;8:68 - PubMed
  23. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Oct;21(e2):e341-6 - PubMed
  24. Med Clin (Barc). 2008 Dec;131 Suppl 5:30-5 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support