Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of ongoing studies

From: The effectiveness of evidence summaries on health policymakers and health system managers use of evidence from systematic reviews: a systematic review

Study ID Methods Participants Intervention description Outcomes
Wilson 2011 [31] RCT Decision makers (programs, services, advocacy) from community-based HIV/AIDS organizations in Canada affiliated with the Canadian AIDS Society and from relevant provincial HIV/AIDS networks At baseline, all participants will receive the “self-serve” evidence service (includes a listing of relevant systematic reviews, links to PubMed records, and worksheets to help find and use research evidence). During the intervention, one group will receive the “full-serve” version of SHARE (Synthesized HIV/AIDS Research Evidence) which includes access to a database of HIV systematic reviews, emailed updates, access to user-friendly summaries, links to scientific abstracts, peer relevance assessments (indicating how useful the information is), as well as an interface for comments in the records, plus links to the full text, and access to worksheets to help find and use evidence. The control group will continue to receive the self-serve evidence service. During the final 2-month period, both groups will receive the full-serve version of SHARE The primary outcome measure will be the mean number of logins/month/organization. The secondary outcome will be intention to use research evidence (measured with a survey administered to one key decision maker from each organization)
Wilson 2015 [32] CBA Clinical Commissioning Groups: governing body and executive members, clinical leads, and any other individuals deemed as being involved in commissioning decision-making processes 3 arms: (1) consulting plus responsive push of tailored evidence (access to an evidence briefing service provided by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) plus advice and support via phone, email, face-to-face; monthly check in to discuss further evidence needs; issues around use of evidence; alert team to new SRs, and other synthesized evidence relevant to priorities); (2) consulting plus an unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence (access to intervention 1 without tailored evidence briefings and instead just evidence briefings without contextual information); or (3) “standard” service (CRD will disseminate evidence briefings generated in intervention 1 and any other non-tailored briefings produced by CRD over the intervention period) Primary outcome: change at 12 months from baseline of a CCGs ability to acquire, assess, adapt, and apply research evidence to support decision-making. Secondary outcomes will measure individuals’ intentions to use research evidence in decision-making