Cargando…
Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Finding current best evidence for clinical decisions remains challenging. With 3,000 new studies published every day, no single evidence-based resource provides all answers or is sufficiently updated. McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service - Federated Search (MacPLUS FS) addresse...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4177052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25239537 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9 |
_version_ | 1782336708989157376 |
---|---|
author | Agoritsas, Thomas Iserman, Emma Hobson, Nicholas Cohen, Natasha Cohen, Adam Roshanov, Pavel S Perez, Miguel Cotoi, Chris Parrish, Rick Pullenayegum, Eleanor Wilczynski, Nancy L Iorio, Alfonso Haynes, R Brian |
author_facet | Agoritsas, Thomas Iserman, Emma Hobson, Nicholas Cohen, Natasha Cohen, Adam Roshanov, Pavel S Perez, Miguel Cotoi, Chris Parrish, Rick Pullenayegum, Eleanor Wilczynski, Nancy L Iorio, Alfonso Haynes, R Brian |
author_sort | Agoritsas, Thomas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND & AIMS: Finding current best evidence for clinical decisions remains challenging. With 3,000 new studies published every day, no single evidence-based resource provides all answers or is sufficiently updated. McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service - Federated Search (MacPLUS FS) addresses this issue by looking in multiple high quality resources simultaneously and displaying results in a one-page pyramid with the most clinically useful at the top. Yet, additional logistical and educational barriers need to be addressed to enhance point-of-care evidence retrieval. This trial seeks to test three innovative interventions, among clinicians registered to MacPLUS FS, to increase the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions. METHODS & DESIGN: In a user-centered approach, we designed three interventions embedded in MacPLUS FS: (A) a web-based Clinical Question Recorder; (B) an Evidence Retrieval Coach composed of eight short educational videos; (C) an Audit, Feedback and Gamification approach to evidence retrieval, based on the allocation of `badges’ and `reputation scores.’ We will conduct a randomized factorial controlled trial among all the 904 eligible medical doctors currently registered to MacPLUS FS at the hospitals affiliated with McMaster University, Canada. Postgraduate trainees (n = 429) and clinical faculty/staff (n = 475) will be randomized to each of the three following interventions in a factorial design (A x B x C). Utilization will be continuously recorded through clinicians’ accounts that track logins and usage, down to the level of individual keystrokes. The primary outcome is the rate of searches per month per user during the six months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes, measured through the validated Impact Assessment Method questionnaire, include: utility of answers found (meeting clinicians’ information needs), use (application in practice), and perceived usefulness on patient outcomes. DISCUSSION: Built on effective models for the point-of-care teaching, these interventions approach evidence retrieval as a clinical skill. If effective, they may offer the opportunity to enhance it for a large audience, at low cost, providing better access to relevant evidence across many top EBM resources in parallel. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02038439. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4177052 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41770522014-09-28 Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials Agoritsas, Thomas Iserman, Emma Hobson, Nicholas Cohen, Natasha Cohen, Adam Roshanov, Pavel S Perez, Miguel Cotoi, Chris Parrish, Rick Pullenayegum, Eleanor Wilczynski, Nancy L Iorio, Alfonso Haynes, R Brian Implement Sci Study Protocol BACKGROUND & AIMS: Finding current best evidence for clinical decisions remains challenging. With 3,000 new studies published every day, no single evidence-based resource provides all answers or is sufficiently updated. McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service - Federated Search (MacPLUS FS) addresses this issue by looking in multiple high quality resources simultaneously and displaying results in a one-page pyramid with the most clinically useful at the top. Yet, additional logistical and educational barriers need to be addressed to enhance point-of-care evidence retrieval. This trial seeks to test three innovative interventions, among clinicians registered to MacPLUS FS, to increase the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions. METHODS & DESIGN: In a user-centered approach, we designed three interventions embedded in MacPLUS FS: (A) a web-based Clinical Question Recorder; (B) an Evidence Retrieval Coach composed of eight short educational videos; (C) an Audit, Feedback and Gamification approach to evidence retrieval, based on the allocation of `badges’ and `reputation scores.’ We will conduct a randomized factorial controlled trial among all the 904 eligible medical doctors currently registered to MacPLUS FS at the hospitals affiliated with McMaster University, Canada. Postgraduate trainees (n = 429) and clinical faculty/staff (n = 475) will be randomized to each of the three following interventions in a factorial design (A x B x C). Utilization will be continuously recorded through clinicians’ accounts that track logins and usage, down to the level of individual keystrokes. The primary outcome is the rate of searches per month per user during the six months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes, measured through the validated Impact Assessment Method questionnaire, include: utility of answers found (meeting clinicians’ information needs), use (application in practice), and perceived usefulness on patient outcomes. DISCUSSION: Built on effective models for the point-of-care teaching, these interventions approach evidence retrieval as a clinical skill. If effective, they may offer the opportunity to enhance it for a large audience, at low cost, providing better access to relevant evidence across many top EBM resources in parallel. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02038439. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2014-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4177052/ /pubmed/25239537 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9 Text en © Agoritsas et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Study Protocol Agoritsas, Thomas Iserman, Emma Hobson, Nicholas Cohen, Natasha Cohen, Adam Roshanov, Pavel S Perez, Miguel Cotoi, Chris Parrish, Rick Pullenayegum, Eleanor Wilczynski, Nancy L Iorio, Alfonso Haynes, R Brian Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials |
title | Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_full | Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_fullStr | Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_short | Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials |
title_sort | increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the macplus fs factorial randomized controlled trials |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4177052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25239537 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT agoritsasthomas increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT isermanemma increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT hobsonnicholas increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT cohennatasha increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT cohenadam increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT roshanovpavels increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT perezmiguel increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT cotoichris increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT parrishrick increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT pullenayegumeleanor increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT wilczynskinancyl increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT iorioalfonso increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT haynesrbrian increasingthequantityandqualityofsearchingforcurrentbestevidencetoanswerclinicalquestionsprotocolandinterventiondesignofthemacplusfsfactorialrandomizedcontrolledtrials |