IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0001166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the usability of the World Health Organization’s conventional tuberculosis guidelines to the eTB recommendations map: A two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial

Author

Listed:
  • Micayla Matthews
  • Tamara Lotfi
  • Nancy Santesso
  • Mark Loeb
  • Dominik Mertz
  • Zain Chagla
  • Anisa Hajizadeh
  • Thomas Piggott
  • Bart Dietl
  • Holger J Schünemann

Abstract

Best practices for the dissemination of global health guidelines has not undergone rigorous research. We used a new approach to digitizing World Health Organization (WHO) global tuberculosis guideline recommendations (eTB RecMap) and compared its usability to the conventional method of accessing TB recommendations using the WHO website. We conducted a two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial using a survey among global stakeholders who were past or planned future users of TB guidelines, recommendations, or policy advice. We assigned participants randomly (1:1) to complete an activity using the WHO eTB RecMap or the conventional website. The primary outcome was the accessibility of information and secondary outcomes understanding, satisfaction, and preference for one of the two formats. Between February 26 and August 29, 2021, we received 478 responses from stakeholders, of whom 244 (122 per group) were eligible and provided analysable results. Participants rated the eTB RecMap as more accessible, on average, when compared to the conventional website (on a seven-point scale, the mean difference {MD} was 0.9; 95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.6, 1.2; p

Suggested Citation

  • Micayla Matthews & Tamara Lotfi & Nancy Santesso & Mark Loeb & Dominik Mertz & Zain Chagla & Anisa Hajizadeh & Thomas Piggott & Bart Dietl & Holger J Schünemann, 2022. "Comparing the usability of the World Health Organization’s conventional tuberculosis guidelines to the eTB recommendations map: A two-arm superiority randomised controlled trial," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(10), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001166
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001166
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0001166&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001166?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0001166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.