Cargando…
A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review
BACKGROUND: Cochrane reviews are one of the best known and most trusted sources of evidence-based information in health care. While steps have been taken to make Cochrane intervention reviews accessible to a diverse readership, little is known about the accessibility of the newcomer to the Cochrane...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3663697/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23680077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32 |
_version_ | 1782271021849509888 |
---|---|
author | Zhelev, Zhivko Garside, Ruth Hyde, Christopher |
author_facet | Zhelev, Zhivko Garside, Ruth Hyde, Christopher |
author_sort | Zhelev, Zhivko |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cochrane reviews are one of the best known and most trusted sources of evidence-based information in health care. While steps have been taken to make Cochrane intervention reviews accessible to a diverse readership, little is known about the accessibility of the newcomer to the Cochrane library: diagnostic test accuracy reviews (DTARs). The current qualitative study explored how healthcare decision makers, who varied in their knowledge and experience with test accuracy research and systematic reviews, read and made sense of DTARs. METHODS: A purposive sample of clinicians, researchers and policy makers (n = 21) took part in a series of think-aloud interviews, using as interview material the first three DTARs published in the Cochrane library. Thematic qualitative analysis of the transcripts was carried out to identify patterns in participants’ ‘reading’ and interpretation of the reviews and the difficulties they encountered. RESULTS: Participants unfamiliar with the design and methodology of DTARs found the reviews largely inaccessible and experienced a range of difficulties stemming mainly from the mismatch between background knowledge and level of explanation provided in the text. Experience with systematic reviews of interventions did not guarantee better understanding and, in some cases, led to confusion and misinterpretation. These difficulties were further exacerbated by poor layout and presentation, which affected even those with relatively good knowledge of DTARs and had a negative impact not only on their understanding of the reviews but also on their motivation to engage with the text. Comparison between the readings of the three reviews showed that more accessible presentation, such as presenting the results as natural frequencies, significantly increased participants’ understanding. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that authors and editors should pay more attention to the presentation as well as the content of Cochrane DTARs, especially if the reports are aimed at readers with various levels of background knowledge and experience. It also raises the question as to the anticipated target audience of the reports and suggests that different groups of healthcare decision-makers may require different modes of presentation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3663697 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36636972013-05-25 A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review Zhelev, Zhivko Garside, Ruth Hyde, Christopher Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Cochrane reviews are one of the best known and most trusted sources of evidence-based information in health care. While steps have been taken to make Cochrane intervention reviews accessible to a diverse readership, little is known about the accessibility of the newcomer to the Cochrane library: diagnostic test accuracy reviews (DTARs). The current qualitative study explored how healthcare decision makers, who varied in their knowledge and experience with test accuracy research and systematic reviews, read and made sense of DTARs. METHODS: A purposive sample of clinicians, researchers and policy makers (n = 21) took part in a series of think-aloud interviews, using as interview material the first three DTARs published in the Cochrane library. Thematic qualitative analysis of the transcripts was carried out to identify patterns in participants’ ‘reading’ and interpretation of the reviews and the difficulties they encountered. RESULTS: Participants unfamiliar with the design and methodology of DTARs found the reviews largely inaccessible and experienced a range of difficulties stemming mainly from the mismatch between background knowledge and level of explanation provided in the text. Experience with systematic reviews of interventions did not guarantee better understanding and, in some cases, led to confusion and misinterpretation. These difficulties were further exacerbated by poor layout and presentation, which affected even those with relatively good knowledge of DTARs and had a negative impact not only on their understanding of the reviews but also on their motivation to engage with the text. Comparison between the readings of the three reviews showed that more accessible presentation, such as presenting the results as natural frequencies, significantly increased participants’ understanding. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that authors and editors should pay more attention to the presentation as well as the content of Cochrane DTARs, especially if the reports are aimed at readers with various levels of background knowledge and experience. It also raises the question as to the anticipated target audience of the reports and suggests that different groups of healthcare decision-makers may require different modes of presentation. BioMed Central 2013-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3663697/ /pubmed/23680077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32 Text en Copyright © 2013 Zhelev et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Zhelev, Zhivko Garside, Ruth Hyde, Christopher A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
title | A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
title_full | A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
title_fullStr | A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
title_full_unstemmed | A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
title_short | A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
title_sort | qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3663697/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23680077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhelevzhivko aqualitativestudyintothedifficultiesexperiencedbyhealthcaredecisionmakerswhenreadingacochranediagnostictestaccuracyreview AT garsideruth aqualitativestudyintothedifficultiesexperiencedbyhealthcaredecisionmakerswhenreadingacochranediagnostictestaccuracyreview AT hydechristopher aqualitativestudyintothedifficultiesexperiencedbyhealthcaredecisionmakerswhenreadingacochranediagnostictestaccuracyreview AT zhelevzhivko qualitativestudyintothedifficultiesexperiencedbyhealthcaredecisionmakerswhenreadingacochranediagnostictestaccuracyreview AT garsideruth qualitativestudyintothedifficultiesexperiencedbyhealthcaredecisionmakerswhenreadingacochranediagnostictestaccuracyreview AT hydechristopher qualitativestudyintothedifficultiesexperiencedbyhealthcaredecisionmakerswhenreadingacochranediagnostictestaccuracyreview |