CClinicalTrials.gg
Sign In
CompletedNCT02414360Updated Apr 10, 2015

Using a Systematic Review in Clinical Decision Making: a Pilot Parallel, Randomized Controlled Trial

An interventional study of Shortened Format and Full Length in Evidence-Based Medicine, sponsored by University of Toronto. Completed. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-04-10.

Sponsored by University of Toronto · Not applicable, Interventional, and Health services research

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
56
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this pilot study is to determine the feasibility of running a full-scale trial that compares two formats of a shortened systematic review to a full-length systematic review to be used in clinical decision-making.

Read the detailed description

Two shortened systematic review formats were developed to enhance their use in clinical decision making. An online randomized controlled trial is planned to make comparisons of the shortened formats to a full-length systematic review. To prepare for the full-scale trial, a pilot study will be conducted to test methods and procedures in order to refine the processes.

02

Conditions studied

  • Evidence-Based Medicine

Keywords

  • Review Literature as Topic
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of Toronto is the lead sponsor of 397 studies on the registry; 59 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Physicians who were in practice full- or part-time at study enrollment were recruited for participation
  • Participants had to have access to the Internet as the study was conducted online.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • The systematic reviews in all formats were only available in English, thus any participants who were not able to read and understand English were not eligible to participate.
  • Anyone who had taken part in any phase of the development of the shortened versions of the systematic reviews (cased-based or evidence-expertise formats) were not eligible for recruitment.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Health services research
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
56 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Shortened Format

    Shortened format of a systematic review

    Other: Shortened Format

  • Active comparator
    Control

    Full length systematic review

    Other: Full Length

Interventions

  • OtherShortened Format

    Shortened format of a systematic review

  • OtherFull Length

    Full length systematic review

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Assessment of participant's answers measured using a kappa statistic

    Feasibility of assessing participants' answers

    Time frame: 6 months

  2. Rate of recruitment

    Feasibility of recruiting participants in a timely manner

    Time frame: 6 months

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Perrier L, Persaud N, Ko A, Kastner M, Grimshaw J, McKibbon KA, Straus SE. Development of two shortened systematic review formats for clinicians. Implement Sci. 2013 Jun 14;8:68. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-68. PubMed 23767771 ↗
  • Perrier L, Kealey MR, Straus SE. An iterative evaluation of two shortened systematic review formats for clinicians: a focus group study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 Oct;21(e2):e341-6. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002660. Epub 2014 May 1. PubMed 24786378 ↗
  • Perrier L, Kealey MR, Straus SE. A usability study of two formats of a shortened systematic review for clinicians. BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 23;4(12):e005919. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005919. PubMed 25537782 ↗
  • Perrier L, Persaud N, Thorpe KE, Straus SE. Using a systematic review in clinical decision making: a pilot parallel, randomized controlled trial. Implement Sci. 2015 Aug 15;10:118. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0303-4. PubMed 26276278 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 10, 2015, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02414360
Lead sponsor
University of Toronto
Responsible party
Laure Perrier (PhD Candidate, University of Toronto) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 10, 2015
Start date
Jul 2014
Primary completion
Aug 2014
Completion
Aug 2014
Last update
Apr 10, 2015

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2015. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Other studies from this sponsor

University of Toronto

Start the discussion