Improving question formulation for use in evidence appraisal in a tertiary care setting: a randomised controlled trial
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN66375463 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN66375463 |
| Protocol serial number | N/A |
| Sponsor | Centre for Clinical Effectiveness (Australia) |
| Funder | Self-funded through internal research funds |
- Submission date
- 07/11/2001
- Registration date
- 07/11/2001
- Last edited
- 07/03/2008
- Recruitment status
- No longer recruiting
- Overall study status
- Completed
- Condition category
- Other
Prospectively registered
Protocol
Statistical analysis plan
Results
Individual participant data
Plain English summary of protocol
Not provided at time of registration
Contact information
Mr Elmer V Villanueva
Scientific
Scientific
Deputy Director
Health Technology Assessment Centre for Clinical Effectiveness
Monash Institute of Health Services Research
246 Clayton Road
Clayton
Victoria
3168
Australia
| Phone | +61 (0)3 9594 7505 |
|---|---|
| Elmer.Villanueva@med.monash.edu.au |
Study information
| Primary study design | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Study design | Randomised controlled trial |
| Secondary study design | Randomised controlled trial |
| Scientific title | |
| Study objectives | The study sought to determine whether adding simple instructions and examples on clinical question formulation would increase the specificity of the question being submitted by the health care professional compared to using a standard form without instructions and examples. |
| Ethics approval(s) | Not provided at time of registration |
| Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied | Question formulation by health care professionals |
| Intervention | New participants were invited to reformulate clinical queries. The control group was given no instructions. The intervention group was given a brief explanation of proper formulation, written instructions, and diagrammatic examples. |
| Intervention type | Other |
| Primary outcome measure(s) |
The change in the proportion of reformulated questions that described each the dimensions of specificity. |
| Key secondary outcome measure(s) |
The differences in the degree by which a particular dimension was specified. |
| Completion date | 30/06/2001 |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Patient |
|---|---|
| Age group | Not Specified |
| Sex | Not Specified |
| Target sample size at registration | 39 |
| Key inclusion criteria | Health care professionals affiliated with a tertiary care health care network in Melbourne, Australia |
| Key exclusion criteria | Previous users of the service |
| Date of first enrolment | 01/07/2000 |
| Date of final enrolment | 30/06/2001 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- Australia
Study participating centre
Deputy Director
Victoria
3168
Australia
3168
Australia
Results and Publications
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | No |
|---|---|
| IPD sharing plan summary | Not provided at time of registration |
| IPD sharing plan |
Study outputs
| Output type | Details | Date created | Date added | Peer reviewed? | Patient-facing? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results article | Results | 01/11/2001 | Yes | No |
