Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: The Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) was established in 2004 by the German federal parliament. It is an independent scientific organisation with several legislative responsibilities designed to improve the evidence basis of the health care services. One of these mandates is the provision of information to consumers and patients. This will be done initially in German and English. Choosing which evidence to communicate to the public is one of the Institute's first key challenges. Several factors make priority-setting for dissemination of Cochrane reviews a complex challenge. For example, less than half of Cochrane reviews are known to be up-to-date [1].
Objectives:
1. To describe the Institute's priority-setting mechanism used to select topics for evidence-based consumer health information for a national German website and its English version.
2. To report on the application of this mechanism to the choice of Cochrane reviews for dissemination to the general public.
Methods: The Institute's priority-setting mechanism was used to identify new and updated Cochrane reviews published in one year (issue 3 of 2004 to issue 2 of 2005) suitable for dissemination to the general public. This process included an initial screening filter followed by a second stage of assessment according to pre-specified criteria to identify eligible reviews. Indicator information on these reviews was provided to all Institute members, along with an online voting form.
Results: Indicators were developed to assess Cochrane reviews according to amount and strength of evidence, interest to the public, population group applicability, and potential contribution to health knowledge and/or evidence literacy. Information on these indicators and the results of their application to one year's worth of new and updated Cochrane reviews will be presented.
Conclusions: A minority of Cochrane reviews may be relevant for dissemination to consumers at a national and international level. Based on the assessment of one year's worth of Cochrane reviews, the proportion of Cochrane reviews which meet criteria for being sufficiently up-to-date and relevant for dissemination to the general public will be estimated.
1. Koch G. Less than half of Cochrane reviews are current. Abstract: 11th Cochrane Colloquium, Barcelona 2003.
Objectives:
1. To describe the Institute's priority-setting mechanism used to select topics for evidence-based consumer health information for a national German website and its English version.
2. To report on the application of this mechanism to the choice of Cochrane reviews for dissemination to the general public.
Methods: The Institute's priority-setting mechanism was used to identify new and updated Cochrane reviews published in one year (issue 3 of 2004 to issue 2 of 2005) suitable for dissemination to the general public. This process included an initial screening filter followed by a second stage of assessment according to pre-specified criteria to identify eligible reviews. Indicator information on these reviews was provided to all Institute members, along with an online voting form.
Results: Indicators were developed to assess Cochrane reviews according to amount and strength of evidence, interest to the public, population group applicability, and potential contribution to health knowledge and/or evidence literacy. Information on these indicators and the results of their application to one year's worth of new and updated Cochrane reviews will be presented.
Conclusions: A minority of Cochrane reviews may be relevant for dissemination to consumers at a national and international level. Based on the assessment of one year's worth of Cochrane reviews, the proportion of Cochrane reviews which meet criteria for being sufficiently up-to-date and relevant for dissemination to the general public will be estimated.
1. Koch G. Less than half of Cochrane reviews are current. Abstract: 11th Cochrane Colloquium, Barcelona 2003.
PDF