Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
The methodology of Cochrane Reviews is considered the gold standard for the production of high-quality evidence. Together with the strict conflict of interest policy and patient focus, the evidence produced is reliable and relevant to health care professionals, policy makers and consumers. Especially for the latter, finding trustworthy and easily accessible information on the internet can be challenging.
Wikipedia is the largest and most popular multilingual online encyclopedia created, maintained as an open collaboration project by a community of volunteer editors. Until now, only 16 of 80 Cochrane Reviews in the field of Haematology are cited on Wikipedia.
Objectives:
To disseminate Cochrane evidence to a broader audience by improving relevant Wikipedia entries with up-to-date and patient-relevant results of Cochrane Haematology Reviews in plain language.
Methods:
On the basis of the PICO-scheme we systematically identified all populations and interventions that are covered within up-to-date Reviews of Cochrane Haematology. In a second step, outcomes reported within the summary-of-findings tables of these reviews were mapped to the populations and interventions. By focusing on the results of the summary-of-findings tables of the reviews we made sure we included results for the prioritised main outcomes.
We then searched for existing Wikipedia entries in German and English language covering topics around the identified target populations and interventions, checked their contents and assessed whether provided information includes complete and accurate evidence. In case we identified evidence gaps, we adapted Wikipedia articles in a systematical and meaningful way by using a standardized wording considering the effect estimates and GRADE assessment of the summary-of-findings table. Generally, the wording was based on the plain language summaries of the reviews. A master student is realizing the project as part of her Master’s thesis.
Results:
We identified 26 target populations and 11 interventions of our reviews to which Wikipedia entries exist. The Master’s student was trained in interpreting summary-of-findings tables and plain language wording. We created accounts for the Wikipedia internal Cochrane Dashboard to monitor the progress so that by mid 2020 the results from up-to-date reviews get incorporated in to Wikipedia in a meaningful way.
Conclusion:
Editing Wikipedia entries with high-quality Cochrane Review results is an easy way to disseminate evidence to a broad and lay audience. In times of ‘fake news’ this might help to incorporate trustworthy information to support informed decision making and making sure that high-quality health research is purposefully used.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
By making sure we cite the review results in plain language we make evidence more accessible to patients and healthcare consumers. Plain language summaries of the reviews, which are commented on and checked by consumers before publication, will form the basis of wording.
The methodology of Cochrane Reviews is considered the gold standard for the production of high-quality evidence. Together with the strict conflict of interest policy and patient focus, the evidence produced is reliable and relevant to health care professionals, policy makers and consumers. Especially for the latter, finding trustworthy and easily accessible information on the internet can be challenging.
Wikipedia is the largest and most popular multilingual online encyclopedia created, maintained as an open collaboration project by a community of volunteer editors. Until now, only 16 of 80 Cochrane Reviews in the field of Haematology are cited on Wikipedia.
Objectives:
To disseminate Cochrane evidence to a broader audience by improving relevant Wikipedia entries with up-to-date and patient-relevant results of Cochrane Haematology Reviews in plain language.
Methods:
On the basis of the PICO-scheme we systematically identified all populations and interventions that are covered within up-to-date Reviews of Cochrane Haematology. In a second step, outcomes reported within the summary-of-findings tables of these reviews were mapped to the populations and interventions. By focusing on the results of the summary-of-findings tables of the reviews we made sure we included results for the prioritised main outcomes.
We then searched for existing Wikipedia entries in German and English language covering topics around the identified target populations and interventions, checked their contents and assessed whether provided information includes complete and accurate evidence. In case we identified evidence gaps, we adapted Wikipedia articles in a systematical and meaningful way by using a standardized wording considering the effect estimates and GRADE assessment of the summary-of-findings table. Generally, the wording was based on the plain language summaries of the reviews. A master student is realizing the project as part of her Master’s thesis.
Results:
We identified 26 target populations and 11 interventions of our reviews to which Wikipedia entries exist. The Master’s student was trained in interpreting summary-of-findings tables and plain language wording. We created accounts for the Wikipedia internal Cochrane Dashboard to monitor the progress so that by mid 2020 the results from up-to-date reviews get incorporated in to Wikipedia in a meaningful way.
Conclusion:
Editing Wikipedia entries with high-quality Cochrane Review results is an easy way to disseminate evidence to a broad and lay audience. In times of ‘fake news’ this might help to incorporate trustworthy information to support informed decision making and making sure that high-quality health research is purposefully used.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
By making sure we cite the review results in plain language we make evidence more accessible to patients and healthcare consumers. Plain language summaries of the reviews, which are commented on and checked by consumers before publication, will form the basis of wording.