Dataset Information

Adding evidence of the effects of treatments into relevant Wikipedia pages: a randomised trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To investigate the effects of adding high-grade quantitative evidence of outcomes of treatments into relevant Wikipedia pages on further information-seeking behaviour by the use of routinely collected data. SETTING:Wikipedia, Cochrane summary pages and the Cochrane Library. DESIGN:Randomised trial. PARTICIPANTS:Wikipedia pages which were highly relevant to up-to-date Cochrane Schizophrenia systematic reviews that contained a Summary of Findings table. INTERVENTIONS:Eligible Wikipedia pages in the intervention group were seeded with tables of best evidence of the effects of care and hyperlinks to the source Cochrane review. Eligible Wikipedia pages in the control group were left unchanged. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Routinely collected data on access to the full text and summary web page (after 12 months). RESULTS:We randomised 70 Wikipedia pages (100% follow-up). Six of the 35 Wikipedia pages in the intervention group had the tabular format deleted during the study but all pages continued to report the same data within the text. There was no evidence of effect on either of the coprimary outcomes: full-text access adjusted ratio of geometric means 1.30, 95%?CI: 0.71 to 2.38; page views 1.14, 95%?CI: 0.6 to 2.13. Results were similar for all other outcomes, with exception of Altmetric score for which there was some evidence of clear effect (1.36, 95%?CI: 1.05 to 1.78). CONCLUSIONS:The pursuit of fair balance within Wikipedia healthcare pages is impressive and its reach unsurpassed. For every person who sought and clicked the reference on the 'intervention' Wikipedia page to seek more information (the primary outcome), many more are likely to have been informed by the page alone. Enriching Wikipedia content is, potentially, a powerful way to improve health literacy and it is possible to test the effects of seeding pages with evidence. This trial should be replicated, expanded and developed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:IRCT2017070330407N2.

SUBMITTER: Adams CE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7045027 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adding evidence of the effects of treatments into relevant Wikipedia pages: a randomised trial.

Adams Clive E CE Montgomery Alan A AA Aburrow Tony T Bloomfield Sophie S Briley Paul M PM Carew Ebun E Chatterjee-Woolman Suravi S Feddah Ghalia G Friedel Johannes J Gibbard Josh J Haynes Euan E Hussein Mohsin M Jayaram Mahesh M Naylor Samuel S Perry Luke L Schmidt Lena L Siddique Umer U Tabaksert Ayla Serena AS Taylor Douglas D Velani Aarti A White Douglas D Xia Jun J

BMJ open 20200220 2

<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate the effects of adding high-grade quantitative evidence of outcomes of treatments into relevant Wikipedia pages on further information-seeking behaviour by the use of routinely collected data.<h4>Setting</h4>Wikipedia, Cochrane summary pages and the Cochrane Library.<h4>Design</h4>Randomised trial.<h4>Participants</h4>Wikipedia pages which were highly relevant to up-to-date Cochrane Schizophrenia systematic reviews that contained a Summary of Findings table.<h4>I ...[more]

PMID: 32086355

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn the era of new information and communication technologies, the Internet is being increasingly accessed for health-related information. Indeed, recently published patient surveys of people with autoimmune disorders confirmed that the Internet was reported as one of the most important health information sources. Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia launched in 2001, is generally one of the most visited websites worldwide and is often consulted for health-related information.ObjectiveThe main objective of this investigation was to quantitatively assess whether the Wikipedia pages related to autoimmune disorders can be easily accessed by patients and their families, in terms of readability.MethodsWe obtained and downloaded a list of autoimmune disorders from the American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association (AARDA) website. We analyzed Wikipedia articles for their overall level of readability with 6 different quantitative readability scales: (1) the Flesch Reading Ease, (2) the Gunning Fog Index, (3) the Coleman-Liau Index, (4) the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, (5) the Automated Readability Index (ARI), and (6) the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG). Further, we investigated the correlation between readability and clinical, pathological, and epidemiological parameters. Moreover, each Wikipedia analysis was assessed according to its content, breaking down the readability indices by main topic of each part (namely, pathogenesis, treatment, diagnosis, and prognosis plus a section containing paragraphs not falling into any of the previous categories).ResultsWe retrieved 134 diseases from the AARDA website. The Flesch Reading Ease yielded a mean score of 24.34 (SD 10.73), indicating that the sites were very difficult to read and best understood by university graduates, while mean Gunning Fog Index and ARI scores were 16.87 (SD 2.03) and 14.06 (SD 2.12), respectively. The Coleman-Liau Index and the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level yielded mean scores of 14.48 (SD 1.57) and 14.86 (1.95), respectively, while the mean SMOG score was 15.38 (SD 1.37). All the readability indices confirmed that the sites were suitable for a university graduate reading level. We found no correlation between readability and clinical, pathological, and epidemiological parameters. Differences among the different sections of the Wikipedia pages were statistically significant.ConclusionsWikipedia pages related to autoimmune disorders are characterized by a low level of readability. The onus is, therefore, on physicians and health authorities to improve the health literacy skills of patients and their families and to create, together with patients themselves, disease-specific readable sites, disseminating highly accessible health-related online information, in terms of both clarity and conciseness.

Project description:BackgroundHip osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of musculoskeletal pain. Exercise is a core recommended treatment. Most evidence is based on muscle-strengthening exercise, but aerobic physical activity has potential to enhance clinical benefits. The primary aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that adding aerobic physical activity to a muscle strengthening exercise leads to significantly greater reduction in hip pain and improvements in physical function, compared to a lower-limb muscle strengthening exercise program alone at 3 months.MethodsThis is a superiority, 2-group, parallel randomised controlled trial including 196 people with symptomatic hip OA from the community. Following baseline assessment, participants are randomly allocated to receive either i) aerobic physical activity and muscle strengthening exercise or; ii) muscle strengthening exercise only. Participants in both groups receive 9 consultations with a physiotherapist over 3 months. Both groups receive a progressive muscle strengthening exercise program in addition to advice about OA management. The aerobic physical activity plan includes a prescription of moderate intensity aerobic physical activity with a goal of attaining 150 min per week. Primary outcomes are self-reported hip pain assessed on an 11-point numeric rating scale (0 = 'no pain' and 10 = 'worst pain possible') and self-reported physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index physical function subscale) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include other measures of self-reported pain (assessed at 0, 3, 9 months), self-reported physical function (assessed at 0, 3, 9 months), performance-based physical function (assessed at 0, 3 months), joint stiffness (assessed at 0, 3, 9 months), quality of life (assessed at 0, 3, 9 months), muscle strength (assessed at 0, 3 months), and cardiorespiratory fitness (assessed at 0, 3 months). Other measures include adverse events, co-interventions, and adherence. Measures of body composition, serum inflammatory biomarkers, quantitative sensory measures, anxiety, depression, fear of movement and self-efficacy are included to explore causal mechanisms.DiscussionFindings will assist to provide an evidence-based recommendation regarding the additional effect of aerobic physical activity to lower-limb muscle strengthening on hip OA pain and physical function.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN 12619001297112. Registered 20th September 2019.

Project description:Health-system policy makers need timely access to synthesised research evidence to inform the policy-making process. No efforts to address this need have been evaluated using an experimental quantitative design. We developed an evidence service that draws inputs from Health Systems Evidence, which is a database of policy-relevant systematic reviews. The reviews have been (a) categorised by topic and type of review; (b) coded by the last year searches for studies were conducted and by the countries in which included studies were conducted; (c) rated for quality; and (d) linked to available user-friendly summaries, scientific abstracts, and full-text reports. Our goal is to evaluate whether a "full-serve" evidence service increases the use of synthesized research evidence by policy analysts and advisors in the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) as compared to a "self-serve" evidence service.We will conduct a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT), along with a follow-up qualitative process study in order to explore the findings in greater depth. For the RCT, all policy analysts and policy advisors (n = 168) in a single division of the MOHLTC will be invited to participate. Using a stratified randomized design, participants will be randomized to receive either the "full-serve" evidence service (database access, monthly e-mail alerts, and full-text article availability) or the "self-serve" evidence service (database access only). The trial duration will be ten months (two-month baseline period, six-month intervention period, and two month cross-over period). The primary outcome will be the mean number of site visits/month/user between baseline and the end of the intervention period. The secondary outcome will be participants' intention to use research evidence. For the qualitative study, 15 participants from each trial arm (n = 30) will be purposively sampled. One-on-one semi-structured interviews will be conducted by telephone on their views about and their experiences with the evidence service they received, how helpful it was in their work, why it was helpful (or not helpful), what aspects were most and least helpful and why, and recommendations for next steps.To our knowledge, this will be the first RCT to evaluate the effects of an evidence service specifically designed to support health-system policy makers in finding and using research evidence.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01307228.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Benefits of cash transfers (CTs) for HIV prevention have been demonstrated largely in purposively designed trials, commonly focusing on young women. It is less clear if CT interventions not designed for HIV prevention can have HIV-specific effects, including adverse effects. The cluster-randomised Manicaland Cash Transfer Trial (2010-11) evaluated effects of CTs on children's (2-17?years) development in eastern Zimbabwe. We evaluated whether this CT intervention with no HIV-specific objectives had unintended HIV prevention spillover effects (externalities). METHODS:Data on 2909 individuals (15-54?years) living in trial households were taken from a general-population survey, conducted simultaneously in the same communities as the Manicaland Trial. Average treatment effects (ATEs) of CTs on sexual behaviour (any recent sex, condom use, multiple partners) and secondary outcomes (mental distress, school enrolment, and alcohol/cigarette/drug consumption) were estimated using mixed-effects logistic regressions (random effects for study site and intervention cluster), by sex and age group (15-29; 30-54?years). Outcomes were also evaluated with a larger synthetic comparison group created through propensity score matching. RESULTS:CTs did not affect sexual debut but reduced having any recent sex (past 30?days) among young males (ATE: -?11.7 percentage points [PP] [95% confidence interval: -26.0PP, 2.61PP]) and females (-?5.68PP [-?15.7PP, 4.34PP]), with similar but less uncertain estimates when compared against the synthetic comparison group (males: -9.68PP [-?13.1PP, -?6.30PP]; females: -8.77PP [-?16.3PP, -?1.23PP]). There were no effects among older individuals. Young (but not older) males receiving CTs reported increased multiple partnerships (8.49PP [-?5.40PP, 22.4PP]; synthetic comparison: 10.3PP (1.27PP, 19.2PP). No impact on alcohol, cigarette, or drug consumption was found. There are indications that CTs reduced psychological distress among young people, although impacts were small. CTs increased school enrolment in males (11.5PP [3.05PP, 19.9PP]). Analyses with the synthetic comparison group (but not the original control group) further indicated increased school enrolment among females (5.50PP [1.62PP, 9.37PP]) and condom use among younger and older women receiving CTs (9.38PP [5.90PP, 12.9PP]; 5.95PP [1.46PP, 10.4PP]). CONCLUSIONS:Non-HIV-prevention CT interventions can have HIV prevention outcomes, including reduced sexual activity among young people and increased multiple partnerships among young men. No effects on sexual debut or alcohol, cigarette, or drug consumption were observed. A broad approach is necessary to evaluate CT interventions to capture unintended outcomes, particularly in economic evaluations. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00966849 . Registered August 27, 2009.

Dataset Information

Adding evidence of the effects of treatments into relevant Wikipedia pages: a randomised trial.

Publications

Adding evidence of the effects of treatments into relevant Wikipedia pages: a randomised trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets