Do Cochrane and non-Cochrane editors and authors prefer reporting statements based on statistically significant differences or do they prefer non-binary options?

GLUJOVSKY D; AGUSTÍN CIAPPONI; BARDACH, A.E.

Congreso; 27th Cochrane Colloquium, London, UK; 2023

Cochrane

Background: For decades, the p value-based interpretation and reporting of resultsdominated the publications. Nowadays, the scientific community agrees that this binaryapproach is not enough. A systemic reform is necessary for moving from this binary approachto some other non-binary options. Some of them, which were discussed in the last CochraneHandbook version (2019), are the point estimate, the confidence interval, and the minimalimportant difference, suggesting some narrative statements. However, it is not clear howhealthcare professionals and consumers agree with this approach and, even more important,whether all retrieve the same conclusions when they look at some specific results.Objectives: To evaluate how healthcare professionals and consumers interpret results andwhich preferred reporting style is for them.Methods: We are conducting an online survey among healthcare professionals andconsumers. These stakeholders have to choose the binary or non-binary option that betterexpresses the results for the following scenario:After exhaustive literature searches, a systematic review identified only two pivotalrandomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of drug X versus placebo(P) in patients with a rare genetic disease. The risk of bias for all domains was low in bothRCTs, and there were no important differences in populations and results between bothstudies. The combined results were:Mortality risk: X 26%(10/39) and P 45%(18/40)Risk difference: X 19% lower (95% CI 40% lower to 1% higher)Risk Ratio: 0.57 (95% CI 0.30 a 1.08) P = 0.0721*95% CI: 95% Confidence Interval (represents the range of values you expect your estimate tofall between if you redo your trial, within a 95% level of confidence).Results: Will be shown at the colloquium.Conclusions: It will be interesting to see which preferred reporting statements are forhealthcare professionals and for consumers. Besides, we will know the level of agreement ordisagreement among these groups, which is critical for the patient-physician communicationprocess.Patient, public and/or healthcare consumer involvement: Healthcare professionals andconsumers responded to the survey.Communicating evidence including misinformation and research transparency