A comparative evaluation of the PDQ-Evidence database: a crossover randomised trial
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN12742235 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12742235 |
| Secondary identifying numbers | N/A |
- Submission date
- 25/03/2015
- Registration date
- 17/04/2015
- Last edited
- 19/03/2018
- Recruitment status
- No longer recruiting
- Overall study status
- Completed
- Condition category
- Other
Plain English Summary
Background and study aims
Policy makers in health care need quick and easy access to reliable health systems evidence in order to make well-informed decisions. However, searching for health systems evidence can be challenging. To try to meet this challenge, PDQ-Evidence was launched in 2012. PDQ-Evidence is a freely available database with thousands of records to publications about health systems, including systematic reviews on how to organise, finance, and govern health systems. Its aim is to become the only database needed to search when looking for health systems evidence. This study tests if PDQ-Evidence is as ‘Pretty Darn Quick’ as it claims to be. It compares how quick and easy PDQ-Evidence is to search, and how well it performs when searching for systematic reviews compared to other databases that also provide access to systematic reviews about health systems evidence.
Who can participate?
Healthcare policy makers, health managers, health researchers and health professionals.
What does the study involve?
Participants complete an online questionnaire, including training and work experience, current position, first language, and prior experience with searching for health systems evidence. Participants try to find systematic reviews that addresses both a pre-defined and an own-defined health systems question, using PDQ-Evidence and two additional self-selected databases. Half of the participants receive a questionnaire where they search PDQ-Evidence before they search the two additional databases. The other half receives a questionnaire where they search PDQ-Evidence after they search the two additional databases. Participants use maximum 10 minutes per question to search for systematic reviews in each database. To report the evidence found that addresses the questions, participants report the title, author and year of maximum three relevant systematic reviews. They also report how much time they spend finding the reviews, and the perceived ease of use of each database they search. Finally, they give feedback on what they like, dislike, and find challenging about PDQ-Evidence, and suggest how PDQ-Evidence can be improved.
What are the possible benefits and risks of participating?
Participants get to know PDQ-Evidence, and to influence further development and improvements of the database. They are indirectly benefiting health care policy makers in need of easy and quick access to reliable health systems evidence. There is no risk associated with participating in this study, perhaps apart from the confiscated time it takes to answer the questionnaire.
Where is the study run from?
Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo (Norway)
When is the study starting and how long is it expected to run for?
November 2013 to June 2017
Who is funding the study?
1. Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo (Norway)
2. European Commission Seventh Framework Programme (Belgium)
Who is the main contact?
Dr Andrew David Oxman
Contact information
Public
Norwegian Institute of Public Health
PO Box 4404, Nydalen
Oslo
N-0403
Norway
 ORCID ID |
0000-0002-5608-5061 |
|---|
Scientific
Norwegian Institute of Public Health
PO Box 4404, Nydalen
Oslo
N-0403
Norway
| ORCID ID |
0000-0002-5608-5061 |
|---|
Study information
| Study design | Single-centre crossover randomised controlled trial |
|---|---|
| Primary study design | Interventional |
| Secondary study design | Randomised cross over trial |
| Study setting(s) | Internet/virtual |
| Study type | Other |
| Participant information sheet | No participant information sheet available |
| Scientific title | A comparative evaluation of the PDQ-Evidence database: a crossover randomised controlled trial |
| Study hypothesis | When searching for systematic reviews about health systems, PDQ-Evidence is more comprehensive, easier and quicker to use compared to the Cochrane Library, EVIPNet, Google Scholar, Health Systems Evidence, PubMed, or Trip database. |
| Ethics approval(s) | Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, section South-East B, Oslo, Norway, 20/05/2014, ref: IRB 0000 1870 |
| Condition | Access to systematic reviews about health systems |
| Intervention | Searching for systematic reviews about health systems using PDQ-Evidence and two of the following databases/search engines: Cochrane Library, EVIPNet, Google Scholar, Health Systems Evidence, PubMed, Trip database. Participants were randomised to either search PDQ-Evidence first or last. |
| Intervention type | Other |
| Primary outcome measure | 1. Was a systematic review that addresses the question found (Yes/No)? For the comparison databases (the two databases selected by the participants) this outcome will be defined as: “Was a systematic review that addresses the question found in either of the two databases?” 2. Time taken to find a systematic review that addresses the question Method: self reporting Time: measured once |
| Secondary outcome measures | 1. Number of relevant systematic reviews found 2. Assessments of the databases with four response options: 2.1. Ease of use (from very difficult to very easy) 2.2. Time spent on searching (from much too much time to very little time) Method: self reporting Time: measured once |
| Overall study start date | 01/11/2013 |
| Overall study end date | 30/06/2017 |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Health professional |
|---|---|
| Age group | Adult |
| Sex | Both |
| Target number of participants | 94 |
| Participant inclusion criteria | 1. Healthcare policy makers 2. Health managers 3. Health researchers 4. Health professionals |
| Participant exclusion criteria | 1. Not healthcare policy makers 2. Not health managers 3. Not health researchers 4. Not health professionals |
| Recruitment start date | 03/11/2014 |
| Recruitment end date | 17/02/2015 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- Argentina
- Bangladesh
- Brazil
- Cameroon
- Canada
- Chile
- China
- India
- Iran
- Italy
- Japan
- Kenya
- Lebanon
- Malawi
- Nigeria
- Norway
- Pakistan
- Senegal
- South Africa
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Uganda
- United Kingdom
- United States of America
Study participating centre
Oslo
N-0403
Norway
Sponsor information
Government
PO Box 4404 Nydalen
Oslo
N-0403
Norway
| Phone | +47 (0)23 25 50 00 |
|---|---|
| post@nokc.no | |
| Website | www.fhi.no/ |
"ROR" |
https://ror.org/046nvst19 |
Funders
Funder type
Government
No information available
Government organisation / National government
- Alternative name(s)
- EC Seventh Framework Programme, European Commission Seventh Framework Programme, EU Seventh Framework Programme, European Union Seventh Framework Programme, FP7
Results and Publications
| Intention to publish date | 31/12/2017 |
|---|---|
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | Yes |
| IPD sharing plan summary | Available on request |
| Publication and dissemination plan | Planned publication in a peer reviewed journal by the end of 2017. |
| IPD sharing plan | The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are/will be available upon request from: marit.johansen@fhi.no |
Study outputs
| Output type | Details | Date created | Date added | Peer reviewed? | Patient-facing? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results article | results | 15/03/2018 | Yes | No |
Editorial Notes
19/03/2018: Publication reference added.
02/08/2017: Confirmed with PI that the trial has been completed and is awaiting publication. The Plain English summary has been updated. The overall trial end date has been updated from 17/02/2015 to 30/06/2017. Participant information sheet has been updated. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services has been replaced as Norwegian Institute of Public Health as a trial participating centre and sponsor/funder. Intention to publish date has been updated from 31/12/2015 to 31/12/2017. The publication and dissemination plan and participant level data sharing plan have been updated. The study contacts have had their addresses changed from the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services and has been replaced with Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Andrew David Oxman email has been udpated from aox@nokc.no to oxman@online.no. Marit Johansen has been updated from maj@nokc.no to marit.johansen@fhi.no.
07/07/2017: No publications found in PubMed, verifying study status with principal investigator.
