Physicians Evidence Retrieval SkillsMPFSNCT02038439
Multifaceted Online Interventions to Increase Clinicians Searching of Current Best Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions
A study testing Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach and Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback in people with Physicians Evidence Retrieval Skills, run by McMaster University at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
Translation of new knowledge from research into evidence-informed health care is a shared obligation of the clinical and the scientific communities. Unfortunately, studies of quality of care continue to show that this goal is substantially unrealized. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Physicians Evidence Retrieval Skills
- What is being tested?
- Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach and Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 908 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Jan 2014to Oct 2014
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- All postgraduate and faculty physicians currently registered for more than one month in the MPFS search engine,
- and working in the teaching hospitals and clinics of the Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
Who cannot join
- Registrants that are no longer working or training at McMaster University,
- Registrants that never logged in MPFS during the last 12 months counting back from the beginning of the trial.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Multifaceted Online Interventions to Increase the Quantity and Quality of Searching for Current Best Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions
Translation of new knowledge from research into evidence-informed health care is a shared obligation of the clinical and the scientific communities. Unfortunately, studies of quality of care continue to show that this goal is substantially unrealized. One main barrier is lack of quick and easy identification, appraisal and synthesis of current best evidence. Clinicians' information have 5 to 8 questions about individual patients per daily shift, but face a large volume of 3000 articles published every day, accessible in many scattered resources.
To address theses problems, McMaster's Health Information Research Unit (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has developed and implemented "McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search" (MPFS), an online search engine that provides a unique 1-stop search and organized access to current best evidence in daily practice. However additional barriers need to be overcome for clinicians to actually search and use this evidence in their practice. Theses include logistical barriers (time constraints, forgotten questions), as well as educational barriers (eg, lack of awareness of the "architecture" of evidence, limited searching skills, and lack of reference standards among peers for finding best evidence).
This randomized trial seeks to test 3 innovative online interventions among clinicians registered to MPFS to overcome these barriers and increase the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions. These interventions build on effective models for the teaching of clinical skills at the point of care, so that clinicians are facilitated in using the search engine as a clinical tool, and perceive evidence retrieval skills as true clinical skills.
Read the detailed description
- Rationale \& Objectives One main barrier to achieving evidence-informed care by clinicians is lack of quick and easy identification, appraisal and synthesis of current best evidence. Clinicians' information needs are considerable - but about 3000 articles are published in Medline every day. Numerous evidence-based resources have been developed to filter and process the evidence, but although increasingly used by clinicians, each offer a fragmented and scattered view of information, and none provides comprehensive topic coverage or satisfactory updating. To address theses problems, McMaster's Health Information Research Unit (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has developed and implemented "McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search (MPFS)", an online search engine that provides a unique 1-stop search and organized access to current best evidence in daily practice. MPFS provides both alerts to users about new research in their chosen disciplines, and a novel federated search function, with the particular feature of organizing information according to the "pyramid of evidence-based resources", with the most clinically applicable evidence at the top. Thus MPFS simultaneously retrieves evidence from Studies ("Medline", both filtered and unfiltered, at the bottom), then Systematic reviews; Synopses of studies and systematic reviews (selected for methodological rigor and clinical relevance), and, at the top level, online widely used Summaries (e.g."Best Practice"). Combining features of the current best evidence-based resources is not enough to increase access and use of current best evidence, as shown by the relatively low utilization of searching features among the hundreds of clinicians currently registered at McMaster University and using the alerting system. Additional well-known barriers that need to be overcome include logistical barriers (time constraints, forgotten questions, and simplicity of using one single albeit limited resource), as well as educational barriers (eg, lack of awareness of the "architecture" of evidence and limits of other single resources, lack of knowledge and experience of what federated searches can offer, limited searching skills, and lack of reference standards among peers for finding best evidence).
- Hypothesis This trial seeks to test 3 innovative online interventions among clinicians registered to MPFS to overcome these barriers and increase the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions. These interventions build on effective models for the teaching of clinical skills at the point of care, so that clinicians are facilitated in using the search engine as a clinical tool, and perceive evidence retrieval skills as true clinical skills.
- Methods
- Study design: Randomized Factorial Controlled Trial.
- Setting and Participants: The trial will be conducted among postgraduate and faculty MD registered in MPFS and working in the teaching hospitals and clinics of McMaster University (see eligibility criteria below)
- Participating clinicians will be randomized to 3 online interventions (see description below) in a factorial design (A x B x C), whose permutation results in 8 allocation arms (A+B+C, A+B, A+C, B+C, A, B, C, no intervention, see details below)
- Randomization: will be computer-generated, stratified training level (post-graduate MD, faculty MD), and baseline frequency of searching for evidence on MPFS. Registrants will be randomly allocated to each study arms. Allocation will be concealed from research staff.
- Blinding and control group: Although participants cannot be blinded to the interventions, they will not be told of the different features offered, and all will receive usual searching features of MPFS.
- Primary and secondary outcomes (see below).
- Conditions
- Physicians Evidence Retrieval Skills
- Being tested
- Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach, Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback
- Keywords
- Evidence-Based Medicine, Evidence Retrieval, Knowledge Translation, Medical Education
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions RecorderBehavioural
Clinicians allocated to this intervention will receive access to an online recorder for the clinical questions at the point of care. The recorder is accessible across a wide range of devices including phones, tablets, and desktop computers.
Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval CoachBehavioural
Clinicians allocated to this intervention will receive online guidance, embedded in the MPFS search engine, in the form of short videos, animations, demos and tips and tricks regarding evidence retrieval.
Intervention C - Online Audit and FeedbackBehavioural
Clinicians allocated to this intervention will receive feedback on their current search performance compared to their peers, both online when using MPFS as well as by e-mail.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Interventions: A + B + C | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered all 3 online interventions combined:
* Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder
* Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach
* Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback Receives: Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder; Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach; Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| Interventions A + B | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered the 2 following interventions combined:
* Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder
* Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach Receives: Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder; Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach |
| Interventions A + C | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered the 2 following online interventions combined:
* Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder
* Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback Receives: Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder; Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| Interventions B + C | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered the 2 following online interventions combined:
* Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach
* Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback Receives: Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach; Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| Intervention A alone | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered only the following intervention:
* Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder Receives: Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder |
| Intervention B alone | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered only the following intervention:
* Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach Receives: Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach |
| Intervention C alone | Experimental | See Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered only the following intervention:
* Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback Receives: Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| No intervention | No intervention | In this arm, clinicians will be offered non of the 3 online interventions, but will just be using the usual features of the search engine available to all users. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Utilization of evidence-based resources on MPFS as measured by rate of searches/month/user
Each clinician participating in the trial has a personal online account in MPFS. When they are signed on their account, the system continuously tracks their searches and utilization of individual resources. We will record their utilization over the full duration of the trial (6 months) and analyze it in the end.
Measured: 6 months
Secondary outcomes (3)
Utility (satisfaction in meeting users' information needs) as assessed by the Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire
This Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire will be sent to clinicians after a random sample of searches and completed online for a random sample of searches.
Measured: 6 months
Use (application of evidence in practice) as assessed by the Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire
This Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire will be sent to clinicians after a random sample of searches and completed online for a random sample of searches.
Measured: 6 months
Perceived Usefulness in patient care and outcomes as assessed by the Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire
This Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire will be sent to clinicians after a random sample of searches and completed online for a random sample of searches.
Measured: 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2014
- Primary completionOct 2014
- Study completionOct 2014
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Physicians Evidence Retrieval SkillsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by McMaster UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 908 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- McMaster University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Thomas Agoritsas, MD, Principal investigator, McMaster University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02038439
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- FRN86465
- Acronym
- MPFS
- Status last verified
- Apr 2015
- First submitted
- 15 Jan 2014
- Last updated
- 8 Apr 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Seguin A, Haynes RB, Carballo S, Iorio A, Perrier A, Agoritsas T. Translating Clinical Questions by Physicians Into Searchable Queries: Analytical Survey Study. JMIR Med Educ. 2020 Apr 20;6(1):e16777. doi: 10.2196/16777.
PubMed 32310137Agoritsas T, Iserman E, Hobson N, Cohen N, Cohen A, Roshanov PS, Perez M, Cotoi C, Parrish R, Pullenayegum E, Wilczynski NL, Iorio A, Haynes RB. Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials. Implement Sci. 2014 Sep 20;9:125. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9.
PubMed 25239537
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Apr 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Multifaceted Online Interventions to Increase the Quantity and Quality of Searching for Current Best Evidence to Answer Clinical Questions
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02038439
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- MPFS / FRN86465
- Conditions
- Physicians Evidence Retrieval Skills
- Keywords
- Evidence-Based Medicine, Evidence Retrieval, Knowledge Translation, Medical Education
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 908 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- McMaster UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
- Study start
- Jan 2014
- Primary completion
- Oct 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Translation of new knowledge from research into evidence-informed health care is a shared obligation of the clinical and the scientific communities. Unfortunately, studies of quality of care continue to show that this goal is substantially unrealized. One main barrier is lack of quick and easy identification, appraisal and synthesis of current best evidence. Clinicians' information have 5 to 8 questions about individual patients per daily shift, but face a large volume of 3000 articles published every day, accessible in many scattered resources.
To address theses problems, McMaster's Health Information Research Unit (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has developed and implemented "McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search" (MPFS), an online search engine that provides a unique 1-stop search and organized access to current best evidence in daily practice. However additional barriers need to be overcome for clinicians to actually search and use this evidence in their practice. Theses include logistical barriers (time constraints, forgotten questions), as well as educational barriers (eg, lack of awareness of the "architecture" of evidence, limited searching skills, and lack of reference standards among peers for finding best evidence).
This randomized trial seeks to test 3 innovative online interventions among clinicians registered to MPFS to overcome these barriers and increase the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions. These interventions build on effective models for the teaching of clinical skills at the point of care, so that clinicians are facilitated in using the search engine as a clinical tool, and perceive evidence retrieval skills as true clinical skills.
Detailed description
- Rationale \& Objectives One main barrier to achieving evidence-informed care by clinicians is lack of quick and easy identification, appraisal and synthesis of current best evidence. Clinicians' information needs are considerable - but about 3000 articles are published in Medline every day. Numerous evidence-based resources have been developed to filter and process the evidence, but although increasingly used by clinicians, each offer a fragmented and scattered view of information, and none provides comprehensive topic coverage or satisfactory updating. To address theses problems, McMaster's Health Information Research Unit (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has developed and implemented "McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service Federated Search (MPFS)", an online search engine that provides a unique 1-stop search and organized access to current best evidence in daily practice. MPFS provides both alerts to users about new research in their chosen disciplines, and a novel federated search function, with the particular feature of organizing information according to the "pyramid of evidence-based resources", with the most clinically applicable evidence at the top. Thus MPFS simultaneously retrieves evidence from Studies ("Medline", both filtered and unfiltered, at the bottom), then Systematic reviews; Synopses of studies and systematic reviews (selected for methodological rigor and clinical relevance), and, at the top level, online widely used Summaries (e.g."Best Practice"). Combining features of the current best evidence-based resources is not enough to increase access and use of current best evidence, as shown by the relatively low utilization of searching features among the hundreds of clinicians currently registered at McMaster University and using the alerting system. Additional well-known barriers that need to be overcome include logistical barriers (time constraints, forgotten questions, and simplicity of using one single albeit limited resource), as well as educational barriers (eg, lack of awareness of the "architecture" of evidence and limits of other single resources, lack of knowledge and experience of what federated searches can offer, limited searching skills, and lack of reference standards among peers for finding best evidence).
- Hypothesis This trial seeks to test 3 innovative online interventions among clinicians registered to MPFS to overcome these barriers and increase the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions. These interventions build on effective models for the teaching of clinical skills at the point of care, so that clinicians are facilitated in using the search engine as a clinical tool, and perceive evidence retrieval skills as true clinical skills.
- Methods
- Study design: Randomized Factorial Controlled Trial.
- Setting and Participants: The trial will be conducted among postgraduate and faculty MD registered in MPFS and working in the teaching hospitals and clinics of McMaster University (see eligibility criteria below)
- Participating clinicians will be randomized to 3 online interventions (see description below) in a factorial design (A x B x C), whose permutation results in 8 allocation arms (A+B+C, A+B, A+C, B+C, A, B, C, no intervention, see details below)
- Randomization: will be computer-generated, stratified training level (post-graduate MD, faculty MD), and baseline frequency of searching for evidence on MPFS. Registrants will be randomly allocated to each study arms. Allocation will be concealed from research staff.
- Blinding and control group: Although participants cannot be blinded to the interventions, they will not be told of the different features offered, and all will receive usual searching features of MPFS.
- Primary and secondary outcomes (see below).
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 8
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Interventions: A + B + C | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach, Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and FeedbackSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered all 3 online interventions combined: * Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder * Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach * Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| Interventions A + B | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval CoachSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered the 2 following interventions combined: * Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder * Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach |
| Interventions A + C | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and FeedbackSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered the 2 following online interventions combined: * Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder * Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| Interventions B + C | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach, Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and FeedbackSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered the 2 following online interventions combined: * Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach * Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| Intervention A alone | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions RecorderSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered only the following intervention: * Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder |
| Intervention B alone | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval CoachSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered only the following intervention: * Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach |
| Intervention C alone | Experimental | Behavioral: Intervention C - Online Audit and FeedbackSee Interventions Description. In this arm, clinicians will be offered only the following intervention: * Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback |
| No intervention | No intervention | –In this arm, clinicians will be offered non of the 3 online interventions, but will just be using the usual features of the search engine available to all users. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- All postgraduate and faculty physicians currently registered for more than one month in the MPFS search engine,
- and working in the teaching hospitals and clinics of the Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Registrants that are no longer working or training at McMaster University,
- Registrants that never logged in MPFS during the last 12 months counting back from the beginning of the trial.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions RecorderClinicians allocated to this intervention will receive access to an online recorder for the clinical questions at the point of care. The recorder is accessible across a wide range of devices including phones, tablets, and desktop computers. | Behavioural | Intervention A alone, Interventions A + B, Interventions A + C, Interventions: A + B + C |
| Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval CoachClinicians allocated to this intervention will receive online guidance, embedded in the MPFS search engine, in the form of short videos, animations, demos and tips and tricks regarding evidence retrieval. | Behavioural | Intervention B alone, Interventions A + B, Interventions B + C, Interventions: A + B + C |
| Intervention C - Online Audit and FeedbackClinicians allocated to this intervention will receive feedback on their current search performance compared to their peers, both online when using MPFS as well as by e-mail. | Behavioural | Intervention C alone, Interventions A + C, Interventions B + C, Interventions: A + B + C |
Primary outcome
Utilization of evidence-based resources on MPFS as measured by rate of searches/month/user
Time frame: 6 months
Each clinician participating in the trial has a personal online account in MPFS. When they are signed on their account, the system continuously tracks their searches and utilization of individual resources. We will record their utilization over the full duration of the trial (6 months) and analyze it in the end.
3 secondary outcomes
Utility (satisfaction in meeting users' information needs) as assessed by the Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire
Time frame: 6 months
Use (application of evidence in practice) as assessed by the Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire
Time frame: 6 months
Perceived Usefulness in patient care and outcomes as assessed by the Impact Assessment Measure questionnaire
Time frame: 6 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Apr 2015.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32310137Seguin A, Haynes RB, Carballo S, Iorio A, Perrier A, Agoritsas T. Translating Clinical Questions by Physicians Into Searchable Queries: Analytical Survey Study. JMIR Med Educ. 2020 Apr 20;6(1):e16777. doi: 10.2196/16777.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25239537Agoritsas T, Iserman E, Hobson N, Cohen N, Cohen A, Roshanov PS, Perez M, Cotoi C, Parrish R, Pullenayegum E, Wilczynski NL, Iorio A, Haynes RB. Increasing the quantity and quality of searching for current best evidence to answer clinical questions: protocol and intervention design of the MacPLUS FS Factorial Randomized Controlled Trials. Implement Sci. 2014 Sep 20;9:125. doi: 10.1186/s13012-014-0125-9.
- online MPFS search engineLink provided by the sponsor.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Thomas Agoritsas, MD principal investigator
McMaster University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Intervention A - Online Clinical Questions Recorder, Intervention B - Online Evidence Retrieval Coach and Intervention C - Online Audit and Feedback in people with Physicians Evidence Retrieval Skills, run by McMaster University at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Apr 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Utilization of evidence-based resources on MPFS as measured by rate of searches/month/user (time frame: 6 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02038439, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Apr 2015.