CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03542201Updated Sep 25, 2018

Comparison of Blogshot Formats With Standard Cochrane Plain Language Formats

An interventional study of PLS and Blogshot in Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, sponsored by University of Split, School of Medicine. Completed at 1 site in Croatia. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 99 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-09-25.

Sponsored by University of Split, School of Medicine · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
238
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 99 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Participants will receive in random order on format of brief description of systematic review summary on health intervention. One group will receive standard plain language summary, while another will receive Cochrane blog shot, containing only few information about the efficacy of the intervention. After reading, their task will be to answer several questions about the material they have read.

02

Conditions studied

  • Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of Split, School of Medicine is the lead sponsor of 49 studies on the registry; 16 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 99 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients visiting their family doctor, students of biomedical studies.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
238 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    PLS

    Plain abstract about the Cochrane systematic review.

    Other: PLS

  • Experimental
    Blogshot

    Blogshot presentation of the results of Cochrane systematic review.

    Other: Blogshot

Interventions

  • OtherPLS

    Participants will have to read standard textual information about the conducted systematic review (approximately 500 words)

  • OtherBlogshot

    Participants will have to read the blogshot information about the results of the Cochrane systematic review (approximately 100 words)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Understanding

    Number of the correct answers about the content of the summary, which will consist of four multiple choice questions (with four possible answers where only one is correct, for each question) about the text the participants are reading. Questions will be developed by research team and revised by expert in health communication. The scale ranges from 0-4, where greater score indicates better understanding of the material.

    Time frame: 3 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Reading experience

    Likert type scale 1-10 (1 indicating low preference for current presentation type, 10 indicating absolute preference for the current presentation type.

    Time frame: 3 months

  2. Health numeracy

    5 questions about the numerical tasks placed in medical content, total score is number of correct answers on those questions. The five questions are part of Numeracy Understanding in Medicine Instrument (Schapira et al, 2012), and we will translate only the questions focusing on Probability section. Cronbach's alpha in previous research was 0.86 (Schapira et al, 2012). The questions will be revised by independent translator and back translated to English.

    Time frame: 3 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Split School of Medicine
    Split, 21000, Croatia
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Schapira MM, Walker CM, Cappaert KJ, Ganschow PS, Fletcher KE, McGinley EL, Del Pozo S, Schauer C, Tarima S, Jacobs EA. The numeracy understanding in medicine instrument: a measure of health numeracy developed using item response theory. Med Decis Making. 2012 Nov-Dec;32(6):851-65. doi: 10.1177/0272989X12447239. Epub 2012 May 25. PubMed 22635285 ↗
  • Buljan I, Tokalic R, Roguljic M, Zakarija-Grkovic I, Vrdoljak D, Milic P, Puljak L, Marusic A. Comparison of blogshots with plain language summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews: a qualitative study and randomized trial. Trials. 2020 May 25;21(1):426. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04360-9. PubMed 32450904 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 25, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03542201
Lead sponsor
University of Split, School of Medicine
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 31, 2018
Start date
Apr 1, 2018
Primary completion
Aug 1, 2018
Completion
Aug 1, 2018
Last update
Sep 25, 2018

Study contacts

Ivan Buljan, MPsy
principal investigator · PhD student

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2018. 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.

Start the discussion