GItool feature | Rating (n,%) | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Unsure | 6 + 7 | |
1. Tool objectives are stated | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 22 | 66 | 0 | 88 |
0.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 2.1 | 5.2 | 22.9 | 65.3 | 0.0 | 91.7 | |
2. Target users of tool are identified | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 19 | 65 | 0 | 84 |
0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 4.2 | 6.3 | 19.8 | 67.8 | 0.0 | 87.5 | |
3. Tool development is clearly described | 0 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 20 | 17 | 45 | 2 | 62 |
0.0 | 1.0 | 6.3 | 5.2 | 20.8 | 17.7 | 46.9 | 2.1 | 64.6 | |
4. Evidence is cited that underpins tool design, development, content | 1 | 0 | 4 | 12 | 11 | 19 | 49 | 0 | 68 |
1.0 | 0.0 | 4.2 | 12.5 | 11.5 | 19.8 | 51.0 | 0.0 | 70.8 | |
5. Quantity and quality of underpinning evidence is described | 1 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 12 | 22 | 40 | 2 | 62 |
1.0 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 15.6 | 12.5 | 22.9 | 41.7 | 2.1 | 64.6 | |
6. Development involved pre-testing (gathering stakeholder needs and suggestions by interview, focus group, survey, etc.) | 3 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 13 | 29 | 39 | 4 | 68 |
3.1 | 2.1 | 0.0 | 6.3 | 13.5 | 30.2 | 40.6 | 4.2 | 70.8 | |
7. Development involved pilot-testing with stakeholders to assess use and satisfaction, and then improve the tool | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 25 | 46 | 5 | 71 |
1.0 | 3.1 | 2.1 | 3.1 | 11.5 | 26.0 | 47.9 | 5.2 | 74.0 | |
8. Development involved full-scale evaluation with a larger sample of stakeholders to thoroughly/rigorously assess impact | 1 | 2 | 9 | 12 | 24 | 19 | 23 | 6 | 42 |
1.0 | 2.1 | 9.4 | 12.5 | 25.0 | 19.8 | 24.0 | 6.3 | 43.8 | |
9. Once implemented, user feedback is prospectively collected to monitor tool use and impact | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 14 | 30 | 42 | 2 | 72 |
0.0 | 1.0 | 3.1 | 4.2 | 14.6 | 31.3 | 43.8 | 2.1 | 75.0 |