Presenting evidence to patients online: what do web users think of consumer summaries of cochrane musculoskeletal reviews?
BACKGROUND
The Internet has the potential to be an effective medium for delivering health care knowledge to consumers. While computer usability research makes recommendations about how to present Web-based information generally, there remains no clear guidance on how to present specific forms of health care research evidence online in a way that facilitates understanding and good health care decision making.


OBJECTIVE
The two goals of this study were to describe the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group's (CMSG's) process for developing online patient-focused summaries of systematic reviews and to evaluate the impressions of these summaries formed by users.


METHODS
A process for summarizing the results of systematic reviews via consumer summaries has evolved over 15 years. An evaluation of this approach took the form of Internet surveys on the Arthritis Society of Canada website and surveys of members of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance (CAPA). Respondents provided information on background, relationship to the decision, their satisfaction with and preparation for decision making, and suggestions for improvements to the summaries. Survey data were collected between August 1, 2005, and February 28, 2006.


RESULTS
A total of 261 respondents completed the survey. The majority (226/261 or 87%) of respondents reported having an arthritis-related condition. The consumer summary approach was generally reviewed favorably by respondents, with most agreeing that the summary provided appropriate information (177/261 or 68%), would be useful to others (160/261 or 61%), was well laid out (159/261 or 61%), was easy to learn from (157/261 or 60%), and was useful to the reader (153/261 or 59%). Areas of potential improvement were indicated by relatively fewer respondents agreeing that they could easily find all the information they wanted (118/261 or 45%), by a substantial proportion being unable to judge whether the providers of the information are reliable (80/261 or 31%), and by a similar proportion being unable to determine whether the information presented was the best available (68/261 or 26%).


CONCLUSIONS
The CMSG has developed an approach to summarizing the results of often-technical systematic reviews into public-friendly consumer summaries. Our online survey showed that this approach was generally well liked but identified specific areas for improvement. Feedback from this survey will help to reshape and improve the current template for consumer summaries used by the CMSG.
Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada. jbrehaut@ohri.ca
Jamie C
JC
Brehaut
Nancy
N
Santesso
Annette M
AM
O'Connor
Alison
A
Lott
Gitte
G
Lindgaard
Ania
A
Syrowatka
Ian D
ID
Graham
Peter S
PS
Tugwell
D000368:Aged; D001168:Arthritis / Q000628:therapy; D054626:Consumer Health Information; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D005260:Female; D019538:Health Care Surveys; D006801:Humans; D020407:Internet; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009140:Musculoskeletal Diseases / Q000628:therapy*; D010353:Patient Education as Topic / Q000379:methods*; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D018802:Patient-Centered Care
Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 05;4:49
19656384
N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 1;342(22):1645-50
10833211
Milbank Q. 1998;76(4):517-63, 509
9879302
Bull World Health Organ. 2006 Aug;84(8):620-8
16917649
Med Care. 2001 Aug;39(8 Suppl 2):II46-54
11583121
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
15471760
Health Educ Res. 2005 Jun;20(3):334-44
15494359
Am J Manag Care. 2009 Jun;15(6):353-60
19514801
JAMA. 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2691-700
12020305
Patient Educ Couns. 1998 Mar;33(3):267-79
9731164
J Rheumatol. 2006 Nov;33(11):2312-8
17086612
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2008;22(4):306-11
21923316
Med Decis Making. 2005 May-Jun;25(3):290-300
15951456
PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e4705
19259269
Annu Rev Public Health. 2003;24:413-33
12428034
Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;Suppl Variation:VAR63-72
15471770
N Engl J Med. 1994 Jun 30;330(26):1895-6
8196734
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 08;(3):CD001431
19588325
Phys Ther. 2007 Dec;87(12):1728-38
17906288