Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 4, 2026
Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits
Published on: September 27, 2019
Usefulness of applying research reporting guidelines as Writing Aid software: a crossover randomised controlled trial
Dana Hawwash1, Melissa K Sharp2,3, Alemayehu Argaw4
1Department of Food Technology, Safety and Health, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium.
Objectives:
To assess the intention of using a Writing Aid software, which integrates four research reporting guidelines (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-nutritional epidemiology) and their Elaboration & Explanation (E&E) documents during the write-up of research in Microsoft Word compared with current practices.
Design:
Two-arms crossover randomised controlled trial with no blinding and no washout period.
Setting:
Face-to-face or online sessions.
Participants:
54 (28 in arm 1 and 26 in arm 2) doctoral and postdoctoral researchers.
Interventions:
Reporting guidelines and their E&E document were randomly administered as Writing Aid or as Word documents in a single 30 min to 1 hour session, with a short break before crossing over to the other study intervention.
Primary And Secondary Outcomes:
Using the Technology Acceptance Model, we assessed the primary outcome: the difference in the mean of intention of use; and secondary outcomes: the difference in mean perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The three outcomes were measured using questions with a 7-point Likert-scale. Secondary analysis using structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to explore the relationships between the outcomes.
Results:
No significant difference in reported intention of use (mean difference and 95% CI 0.25 (-0.05 to 0.55), p=0.10), and perceived usefulness (mean difference and 95% CI 0.19 (-0.04 to 0.41), p=0.10). The Writing Aid performed significantly better than the word document on researchers' perceived ease of use (mean difference and 95% CI 0.59 (0.29 to 0.89), p<0.001). In the SEM analysis, participants' intention of using the tools was indirectly affected by perceived ease of use (beta 0.53 p=0.002).
Conclusions:
Despite no significant difference in the intention of use between the tools, administering reporting guidelines as Writing Aid is perceived as easier to use, offering a possibility to further explore its applicability to enhance reporting adherence.
More Related Videos
11:29Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools
Published on: June 20, 2020
08:36Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
Related Concept Videos
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
02:01Group Design
01:16Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
01:15Study Design in Statistics
Does aspirin reduce the risk of heart attacks? Is one brand of fertilizer more effective at growing roses than another? Is fatigue as dangerous to a driver as the influence of alcohol? Questions like these are answered using randomized experiments with proper...
02:07Blind Procedures