Table 1 PICO for the review
Population: professional audiences | The population for our review was health professionals, policymakers, guideline developers and healthcare commissioners, not restricted by age, sex, location or other demographic factors |
Intervention: interventions to communicate or disseminate the results of clinical studies | We were interested in interventions aiming to disseminate or communicate the overall results of clinical studies to the population described above. We were primarily interested in interventions sharing the results of phase III non-commercial clinical trials but also explored the literature on disseminating the results of other clinical research study designs that are likely to generate evidence with direct implications for policy and practice (for example, systematic reviews and cohort studies). We did not pre-specify which interventions (dissemination methods) we were interested in, as we wished to be inclusive of all strategies that had been examined in the literature |
Comparator/study design: no comparator specified | We did not specify a particular comparator or study design |
Outcomes: changes in policy and clinical practice | We explored a range of outcomes, covering the out-takes, outcomes and impact dimensions of the International Association for the Measurement and Evaluation of Communication Framework [4]. Our co-primary outcomes were changes in the recommendations made in clinical policy documents and clinical guidelines published by professional bodies or government agencies and changes in clinical practice |