Gustavo Saposnik, Philippe N. Tobler, Fernando Caceres, Maria A. Terzaghi, Christian Ruff, Jorge Maurino, Manuel Fruns Quintana, Jiwon Oh, Xavier Montalban, Muhammad Mamdani
Abstract
Background: Educational interventions are needed to overcome knowledge-to-action gaps in clinical care. We previously tested the feasibility and potential efficacy of an educational intervention that facilitates treatment decisions in multiple sclerosis care. A demonstration of the usability of such an intervention is crucial prior to demonstration of efficacy in a large trial. Objectives: To evaluate the usability of a novel, pilot-tested intervention aimed at neurologists to improve therapeutic decisions in multiple sclerosis (MS) care. Methods: We surveyed 50 neurologists from Chile, Argentina, and Canada randomized to an educational intervention arm of a pilot feasibility study using the System Usability Score (SUS) to assess the usability of a traffic light system (TLS)-based educational intervention. The TLS facilitates therapeutic decisions, allowing participants to easily recognize high-risk scenarios requiring treatment escalation. The SUS is a validated 10-item questionnaire with five response options. The primary outcome was the average and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the SUS score. Values above 68 are considered highly usable. Results: Of 50 neurologists invited to be part of the study, all completed the SUS scale and the study. For the primary outcome, the average usability score was 74.7 (95%CI 70.1-79.2). There was one outlier with a score of 35. The usability score excluding the outlier was 76.8 (95%CI 72.7-80.8). Multivariate analysis revealed no association between participants' characteristics and the SUS score. Conclusions: Our educational intervention has shown high usability among neurologists. The next step is to evaluate the effectiveness of this educational intervention in facilitating treatment decisions for the management of multiple sclerosis in a large trial.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 January 2020.
All research outputs
#5,806,574
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,979
of 12,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,717
of 326,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#79
of 320 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,012 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,353 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 320 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
