|
Summary statement [30]
|
Share material on a website [24, 43]
|
Graded format with key messages [47]
|
|
1-page summaries in plain language [49]
|
Provide tailored, targeted messages for relevant audiences [24]
|
Recipe type guidance, the information indicates this, this, and this [52]
|
|
Abbreviated format of research evidence, such as an executive summary, would be preferable (1 to 2 pages long ) [43]
|
Electronic communication channels are generally preferred [43]
|
Title framed as a question [47]
|
|
Expectations of short, clear summary [47]
|
Newsletters containing summaries of current research developed and directly emailed to managers [43]
|
Reformatting the text to make it easier to pick out important parts [47]
|
|
Boxes placed throughout the summaries [47]
| |
Chart on first page describing what review is about [47]
|
|
Summary of findings tables [47]
|
Reports could be either distributed through professional organisations or through a clearinghouse [43]
|
A modified academic abstract (relevance and description of review characteristics including the impact, applicability to setting, costs, or other considerations and need for no further evaluation) [47]
|
|
1-page summaries with references, so the reader is able to investigate further, and case studies [49]
|
Active delivery of information (as opposed to access to online registry) [24]
|
Preference for less dense, more accessible literature [49]
|
| | |
Wanted a shorter, clearer presentation [47]
|
| | |
A bullet point evaluation or rating system of study design quality so that for those of us who do not make our living doing that, we do not have to read a half dozen pages to ferret it out [44]
|
| | |
Develop a more user-friendly “front end” for potentially relevant systematic reviews (e.g. 1 page of take-home messages and a 3-page executive summary) to facilitate rapid assessments of the relevance of a review by health care managers and policy makers and, when the review is deemed highly relevant, more graded entry into the full details of the review [45]
|
| | |
Well written and concise [47]
|
| | |
Limiting the number of tables and not letting them break across pages [47]
|
| | |
Simplifying the text and tables and ensuring that the results in the text matched those in the tables [47]
|
| | |
Moving partner logos and the summary publication date to the front page [47]
|
