ArticleBMC health services research2016
Improving the user experience of patient versions of clinical guidelines: user testing of a Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) patient version.
Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Processes for Developing Plain Language Versions of Guidelines Recommendations: A Scoping Review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Perceptions and Attitudes of People With Cancer and Diabetes Towards Patient Guidelines: A Mixed Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Breaking Barriers: The Design and Development of an Assistive Technology Web App for Older Latinos with Disabilities in Daily Activities.Technologies · 2024Article
- Recommendations to improve use and dissemination of patient versions of oncological clinical practice guidelines in Germany: results of a multi-stakeholder workshop.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Methodology and reporting quality of patient and public versions of guidelines in China: A systematic review.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2024Article
- Plain Language vs Standard Format for Youth Understanding of COVID-19 Recommendations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA pediatrics · 2023Article
- The perceptions and experience of developing patient (version of) guidelines: a descriptive qualitative study with Chinese guideline developers.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Patient and public involvement in the development of clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- User testing of a Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network public guideline for the parents of children with autism.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- User testing a patient information resource about potential complications of vaginally inserted synthetic mesh.BMC women's health · 2021Article
- The reporting checklist for public versions of guidelines: RIGHT-PVG.Implementation science : IS · 2021Review
- EB2020 1st World Congress on Epidermolysis Bullosa, January 19-23, 2020, London, UK.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2020Article
- Co-Creation with Older Adults to Improve User-Experience of a Smartphone Self-Test Application to Assess Balance Function.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- How do guideline developers identify, incorporate and report patient preferences? An international cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Comparative Usability Analysis and Parental Preferences of Three Web-Based Knowledge Translation Tools: Multimethod Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- The effectiveness of digital multimedia presentation of trial information on recruitment and retention of patients: Protocol for a study within a trial (SWAT).HRB open research · 2020Article
- Technology use and preferences to support clinical practice guideline awareness and adherence in individuals with sickle cell disease.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Article
- Adapting medical guidelines to be patient-centered using a patient-driven process for individuals with sickle cell disease and their caregivers.BMC hematology · 2018Article
- Participatory improvement of a template for informed consent documents in biobank research - study results and methodological reflections.BMC medical ethics · 2017Article
- An integrated conceptual framework for evaluating and improving 'understanding' in informed consent.Trials · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGuideline producers are increasingly producing versions of guidelines for the public, and knowledge of what the public want from them is also increasing. The aim of this study was to user test a patient version of a SIGN clinical guideline that was designed based on preliminary work for the DECIDE project. SIGN is the leading national guideline producer in Scotland.
methodsPeople with a diagnosis of glaucoma and non-professional carers were recruited from across Scotland. User testing was conducted using a think-aloud protocol method. Each session was conducted by one interviewer and one observer. All sessions were recorded and transcribed. The data was analysed, problems with the guideline were identified and resolved and key findings were themed using a user experience model.
resultsThirteen user testing sessions with people with glaucoma and one with a carer were conducted. Key facilitators of desirability and usability identified include clear branding as a patient version and a clearly described purpose, audience and contents page. Other facilitators include a "friendly" tone which is achieved by the use of colour, quotes, icons, simple language and charts, and brief chunked text. The value and usefulness of the patient guideline was influenced by its ability to: inform the public, link information to actions, and empower people in their interaction with healthcare professionals. Participants were disappointed by the lack of information on treatment in the patient version, which was outside its scope. Information on the evidence based guideline production process and the involvement of appropriately skilled professionals was key to the credibility of the guideline. Lack of awareness of guidelines and guideline producing bodies, is a potentially serious threat to findability/accessibility.
conclusionsIt is important for guideline producers to maximise the user experience of the public when they access patient versions of guidelines, particularly given the current low level of access and awareness. One size does not fit all and guideline producers need to strike a balance between keeping the patient version simple and providing sufficient information to facilitate shared decision making and empower the public. Guideline producers may find the results of this study useful in designing their own patient versions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.