Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24103318›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2013

Wikis and collaborative writing applications in health care: a scoping review.

Patrick M Archambault, Tom H van de Belt, Francisco J Grajales, Marjan J Faber, Craig E Kuziemsky, Susie Gagnon, Andrea Bilodeau, Simon Rioux, Willianne L D M Nelen, Marie-Pierre Gagnon and 7 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04093245 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Supporting the Creation of a LEARNing INteGrated Health System to Mobilize Context-adapted Knowledge With a Wiki Platform to Improve the Transitions of Frail Seniors From From Hospitals and Emergency Departments to the cOMmunity: Phase II

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2019 to 2022Enrolled4,000ConditionsTransition, Emergencies, Health Care Utilization, FrailtyArmsGEM nurse, pre- and post-hospitalization medication list reconciliation, systematic discharge summaries, medical follow-up appointment, follow-up phone call
NCT04140084 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Wiki Head CT Choice Study: Adaptation of Two Decision Aids to Support Shared Decision Making About Performing a Head CT for Adult and Pediatric Victims of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2018 to 2020Enrolled40ConditionsMild Traumatic Brain Injury, Emergencies, Decision-makingArmsReal-life clinical meetings
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Medical wikis dedicated to clinical practice: a systematic review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Developing a toolkit for building a community hospital clinical research program.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Long-term views on chronic kidney disease research priorities among stakeholders engaged in a priority-setting partnership: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.

Patrick M ArchambaultDépartement de médecine familiale et médecine d'urgence, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada. patrick.m.archambault@gmail.com.
Tom H van de Belt
Francisco J Grajales
Marjan J Faber
Craig E Kuziemsky
Susie Gagnon
Andrea Bilodeau
Simon Rioux
Willianne L D M Nelen
Marie-Pierre Gagnon
Alexis F Turgeon
Karine Aubin
Irving Gold
Julien Poitras
Gunther Eysenbach
Jan A M Kremer
France Légaré
Cégep de Lévis · CARadboud University Nijmegen · NLThe Quebec Population Health Research Network · CAAssociation of Universities and Colleges of Canada · CACentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-Appalaches · CAUniversité du Québec à Rimouski · CAUniversité Laval · CAUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research FRN 116632
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCollaborative writing applications (eg, wikis and Google Documents) hold the potential to improve the use of evidence in both public health and health care. The rapid rise in their use has created the need for a systematic synthesis of the evidence of their impact as knowledge translation (KT) tools in the health care sector and for an inventory of the factors that affect their use.

objectiveThrough the Levac six-stage methodology, a scoping review was undertaken to explore the depth and breadth of evidence about the effective, safe, and ethical use of wikis and collaborative writing applications (CWAs) in health care.

methodsMultiple strategies were used to locate studies. Seven scientific databases and 6 grey literature sources were queried for articles on wikis and CWAs published between 2001 and September 16, 2011. In total, 4436 citations and 1921 grey literature items were screened. Two reviewers independently reviewed citations, selected eligible studies, and extracted data using a standardized form. We included any paper presenting qualitative or quantitative empirical evidence concerning health care and CWAs. We defined a CWA as any technology that enables the joint and simultaneous editing of a webpage or an online document by many end users. We performed qualitative content analysis to identify the factors that affect the use of CWAs using the Gagnon framework and their effects on health care using the Donabedian framework.

resultsOf the 111 studies included, 4 were experimental, 5 quasi-experimental, 5 observational, 52 case studies, 23 surveys about wiki use, and 22 descriptive studies about the quality of information in wikis. We classified them by theme: patterns of use of CWAs (n=26), quality of information in existing CWAs (n=25), and CWAs as KT tools (n=73). A high prevalence of CWA use (ie, more than 50%) is reported in 58% (7/12) of surveys conducted with health care professionals and students. However, we found only one longitudinal study showing that CWA use is increasing in health care. Moreover, contribution rates remain low and the quality of information contained in different CWAs needs improvement. We identified 48 barriers and 91 facilitators in 4 major themes (factors related to the CWA, users' knowledge and attitude towards CWAs, human environment, and organizational environment). We also found 57 positive and 23 negative effects that we classified into processes and outcomes.

conclusionsAlthough we found some experimental and quasi-experimental studies of the effectiveness and safety of CWAs as educational and KT interventions, the vast majority of included studies were observational case studies about CWAs being used by health professionals and patients. More primary research is needed to find ways to address the different barriers to their use and to make these applications more useful for different stakeholders.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorDelivery of Health CareInternetWritingHumanscollaborative authoringcollaborative writing applicationscrowdsourcingehealthevidence-based medicineGoogle DocsGoogle KnolInternetknowledge managementknowledge translationmedical informaticsparticipatory medWeb 2.0WikiWikipedia

Identifiers

PMID24103318
PMCPMC3929050
OpenAlexW2166704201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.