Getting best current evidence into practice through a web-based authoring and publication platform: qualitative study of technological barriers and solutions

Article type
Authors
Brandt L1, Kristiansen A1, Agoritsas T2, Fog Heen A1, Guyatt G3, Vandvik PO4
1Department of Medicine, Innlandet Hospital Trust-division Gjøvik, Norway
2Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Canada, Canada
3Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Canada
4Institute for Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway
Abstract
Background: Trustworthy evidence summaries and guidelines are key information resources for clinicians. Digital structuring of content and optimization of presentation formats for a variety of digital platforms can facilitate successful dissemination and use at the point of care.
Objectives: To test and improve the accessibility, understandability and utility in meeting clinicians' information needs of evidence summaries and recommendations published in multilayered formats on the web, smartphones and tablets.
Methods: We have created a platform (www.MAGICapp.org) to author, publish and update dynamically trustworthy evidence summaries and guidelines developed with the GRADE system. Following publication of the first guideline through MAGICapp with 249 recommendations and supporting evidence summaries for antithrombotic therapy, we performed user-testing with 12 physicians in Norwegian hospitals. Our multidisciplinary team of designers, programmers, clinicians and researchers applied qualitative methods with both direct observation and semi-structured interviews and performed iterative improvements in functionality of MAGICapp.
Results: We implemented improvements in MAGICapp related to the following main issues in accessibility: delay from login to accessing content (e.g. more than three minutes on old browsers on hospital desktop stations); need for a comprehensive disclaimer for use in practice, suboptimal display of recommendations and PICO questions (e.g. physicians did not intuitively find where to click to access deeper layers of information); poor scrolling functionality on mobile devices; too much screen space used for less relevant information (e.g. table of contents); need for better offline access, and search functionality for recommendations. Problems with understanding and utility of content related to: conceptual understanding of GRADE (e.g. quality of evidence, risk and uncertainty), wording being sometimes imprecise or technical, incomplete access to references and abstracts.
Conclusions: The barriers identified illustrate challenges and solutions for getting evidence into practice through innovative technological platforms.