126 resultados para User reviews
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Abstracts and plain language summaries (PLS) are often the first, and sometimes the only, point of contact between readers and systematic reviews. It is important to identify how these summaries are used and to know the impact of different elements, including the authors' conclusions. The trial aims to assess whether (a) the abstract or the PLS of a Cochrane Review is a better aid for midwifery students in assessing the evidence, (b) inclusion of authors' conclusions helps them and (c) there is an interaction between the type of summary and the presence or absence of the conclusions.
METHODS: Eight hundred thirteen midwifery students from nine universities in the UK and Ireland were recruited to this 2 × 2 factorial trial (abstract versus PLS, conclusions versus no conclusions). They were randomly allocated to one of four groups and asked to recall knowledge after reading one of four summary formats of two Cochrane Reviews, one with clear findings and one with uncertain findings. The primary outcome was the proportion of students who identified the appropriate statement to describe the main findings of the two reviews as assessed by an expert panel.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in correct response between the abstract and PLS groups in the clear finding example (abstract, 59.6 %; PLS, 64.2 %; risk difference 4.6 %; CI -0.2 to 11.3) or the uncertain finding example (42.7 %, 39.3 %, -3.4 %, -10.1 to 3.4). There was no significant difference between the conclusion and no conclusion groups in the example with clear findings (conclusions, 63.3 %; no conclusions, 60.5 %; 2.8 %; -3.9 to 9.5), but there was a significant difference in the example with uncertain findings (44.7 %; 37.3 %; 7.3 %; 0.6 to 14.1, p = 0.03). PLS without conclusions in the uncertain finding review had the lowest proportion of correct responses (32.5 %). Prior knowledge and belief predicted student response to the clear finding review, while years of midwifery education predicted response to the uncertain finding review.
CONCLUSIONS: Abstracts with and without conclusions generated similar student responses. PLS with conclusions gave similar results to abstracts with and without conclusions. Removing the conclusions from a PLS with uncertain findings led to more problems with interpretation.
Resumo:
Learning from visual representations is enhanced when learners appropriately integrate corresponding visual and verbal information. This study examined the effects of two methods of promoting integration, color coding and labeling, on learning about probabilistic reasoning from a table and text. Undergraduate students (N = 98) were randomly assigned to learn about probabilistic reasoning from one of 4 computer-based lessons generated from a 2 (color coding/no color coding) by 2 (labeling/no labeling) between-subjects design. Learners added the labels or color coding at their own pace by clicking buttons in a computer-based lesson. Participants' eye movements were recorded while viewing the lesson. Labeling was beneficial for learning, but color coding was not. In addition, labeling, but not color coding, increased attention to important information in the table and time with the lesson. Both labeling and color coding increased looks between the text and corresponding information in the table. The findings provide support for the multimedia principle, and they suggest that providing labeling enhances learning about probabilistic reasoning from text and tables
Resumo:
Background Physical rehabilitation interventions aim to ameliorate the effects of critical illness-associated muscle dysfunction in survivors. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews (SR) evaluating the effect of these interventions across the continuum of recovery.
Methods Six electronic databases (Cochrane Library, CENTRAL, DARE, Medline, Embase, and Cinahl) were searched. Two review authors independently screened articles for eligibility and conducted data extraction and quality appraisal. Reporting quality was assessed and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach applied to summarise overall quality of evidence.
Results Five eligible SR were included in this overview, of which three included meta-analyses. Reporting quality of the reviews was judged as medium to high. Two reviews reported moderate-to-high quality evidence of the beneficial effects of physical therapy commencing during intensive care unit (ICU) admission in improving critical illness polyneuropathy/myopathy, quality of life, mortality and healthcare utilisation. These interventions included early mobilisation, cycle ergometry and electrical muscle stimulation. Two reviews reported very low to low quality evidence of the beneficial effects of electrical muscle stimulation delivered in the ICU for improving muscle strength, muscle structure and critical illness polyneuropathy/myopathy. One review reported that due to a lack of good quality randomised controlled trials and inconsistency in measuring outcomes, there was insufficient evidence to support beneficial effects from physical rehabilitation delivered post-ICU discharge.
Conclusions Patients derive short-term benefits from physical rehabilitation delivered during ICU admission. Further robust trials of electrical muscle stimulation in the ICU and rehabilitation delivered following ICU discharge are needed to determine the long-term impact on patient care. This overview provides recommendations for design of future interventional trials and SR.
Resumo:
Objectives:
The process evaluation will consider the views of the appointed SUN workers and representatives from selected service user groups as regards the setting up and maintenance of the SUN network. This component of the evaluation will also examine the perceptions of stakeholders from a number of relevant organisations.
The outcome evaluation will assess the effectiveness of the SUN project in achieving the intended outcomes as outlined in the original Action Plans.
The following outcomes will be evaluated:
To ascertain the level to which the SUN has provided support, information and advice to existing service user groups.
To examine the SUN co-ordination of Trust and regional networks of service user groups.
To consider how the SUN assists organisations to establish and maintain service user groups.
To examine the level of current and future membership of service users on relevant groups, with a particular focus on engagement of hard to reach populations.
To gauge service user perceptions of the Service User Network.
To examine the levels of training provided and consider the efficacy of training.
Resumo:
DESIGN We will address our research objectives by searching the published and unpublished literature and conducting an evidence synthesis of i) studies of the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions provided for children and adolescents who have suffered maltreatment, ii) economic evaluations of these interventions and iii) studies of their acceptability to children, adolescents and their carers. SEARCH STRATEGY: Evidence will be identified via electronic databases for health and allied health literature, social sciences and social welfare, education and other evidence based depositories, and economic databases. We will identify material generated by user-led,voluntary sector enquiry by searching the internet and browsing the websites of relevant UK government departments and charities. Additionally, studies will be identified via the bibliographies of retrieved articles/reviews; targeted author searches; forward citation searching. We will also use our extensive professional networks, and our planned consultations with key stakeholders and our study steering committee. Databases will be searched from inception to time of search. REVIEW STRATEGY Inclusion criteria: 1) Infants, children or adolescents who have experienced maltreatment between the ages of 0 17 years. 2) All psychosocial interventions available for maltreated children and adolescents, by any provider and in any setting, aiming to address the sequelae of any form of maltreatment, including fabricated illness. 3) For synthesis of evidence of effectiveness: all controlled studies in which psychosocial interventions are compared with no-treatment, treatment as usual, waitlist or other-treated controls. For a synthesis of evidence of acceptability we will include any design that asks participants for their views or provides data on non-participation. For decision-analytic modelling we may include uncontrolled studies. Primary and secondary outcomes will be confirmed in consultation with stakeholders. Provisional primary outcomes are psychological distress/mental health (particularly PTSD, depression and anxiety, self-harm); ii) behaviour; iii) social functioning; iv) cognitive / academic attainment, v) quality of life, and vi) costs. After studies that meet the inclusion criteria have been identified (independently by two reviewers), data will be extracted and risk of bias (RoB) assessed (independently by two reviewers) using the Cochrane Collaboration RoB Tool (effectiveness), quality hierarchies of data sources for economic analyses (cost-effectiveness) and the CASP tool for qualitative research (acceptability). Where interventions are similar and appropriate data are available (or can be obtained) evidence synthesis will be performed to pool the results. Where possible, we will explore the extent to which age, maltreatment history (including whether intra- or extra-familial), time since maltreatment, care setting (family / out-of-home care including foster care/residential), care history, and characteristics of intervention (type, setting, provider, duration) moderate the effects of psychosocial interventions. A synthesis of acceptability data will be undertaken, using a narrative approach to synthesis. A decision-analytic model will be constructed to compare the expected cost-effectiveness of the different types of intervention identified in the systematic review. We will also conduct a Value of information analysis if the data permit. EXPECTED OUTPUTS: A synthesis of the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for maltreated children (taking into account age, maltreatment profile and setting) and their acceptability to key stakeholders.