This randomized controlled trial will assess the interpretability of the rank-heat plot for presenting the results of network meta-analysis in comparison to SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) plots which are suggested to present one of the best ranking statistics.
Clinicians are responsible for making decisions to improve health outcomes. When available, clinicians should use the results of a knowledge synthesis, such as systematic reviews and meta-analyses, to inform decision-making. Pairwise meta-analyses are limited, however, by the availability of RCTs that directly compare interventions. This is troublesome for knowledge users who require results from comparisons of multiple interventions to inform decision-making. To address this concern, the use of network meta-analyses (NMAs) is increasing in healthcare the literature. NMAs are a useful tool because they can summarize results from numerous studies and interventions. It is unclear how NMA results should be presented to increase the likelihood of clinicians understanding and using the results to improve health outcomes. Thus, a randomized controlled trial of NMA plots will be conducted. Participants will be randomized to either the rank-heat plot (intervention) or SUCRA plots (control) that present the same NMA results of a study that explored the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions for falls prevention. Outcomes will be ascertained via an online survey. The RCT will take place in an online environment and will require each participant to partake in a single session. This study will help guide best practices for the presentation of reviews to improve the uptake and use of NMA.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
SINGLE
provides a visual presentation of treatment hierarchy across multiple outcomes
provides a visual presentation of treatment ranking for a single outcome.
Proportion of participants who appropriately define the clinical "bottom line." Participants' answers will be independently evaluated by two investigators for agreement with an expert panel's recommendation.
Time frame: during experiment via single session, <1 hour survey
Proportion of participants who accurately apply the evidence to the provided clinical scenario.
Time frame: during experiment via single session, <1 hour survey
Completeness of survey data evaluated by two independent investigators
Time frame: Immediate post-experiment
Time taken to complete survey
Time frame: Immediate post-experiment
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.