Skip to main content

Table 6 Section 1 of the survey: questions related to the understanding of the objective and use of the tool, and the percentages obtained for each type of answer

From: Synthesizing evidence from clinical trials with dynamic interactive argument trees

Questions %S-1 %S-2 %S-3 %S-4 %S-5
1. The motivation and goals behind the development of the tool are clear to me. 0.00 5.88 5.88 23.53 64.71
2. The explanations in the video on using the tool are understandable. 0.00 5.88 11.76 11.76 70.59
3. I understand how to set a filter on the clinical studies being considered. 5.88 0.00 5.88 17.65 70.59
4. I understand what setting a filter does. 5.88 0.00 0.00 23.53 70.59
5. I understand how to change the weights of the individual dimensions. 11.76 5.88 5.88 23.53 52.94
6. I understand the influence of the weighting of the different dimensions (safety, efficacy) on the conclusion of the system. 0.00 11.76 11.76 11.76 64.71
7. The conclusion of he system is clear and understandable. 0.00 0.00 17.75 29.41 52.94
8. It is understandable how the system comes to the conclusions based on the selected clinical studies. 0.00 11.76 23.53 11.76 52.94
9. It is clear how to include or exclude a study in the calculation of the conclusion. 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.18 58.82
10. The metadata shown for the individual studies is sufficient to assess the relevance of the study with regard to its inclusion. 0.00 11.76 35.29 35.29 17.65
  1. S-1: strongly disagree, S-2: disagree, S-3: neither agree nor disagree, S-4: agree, S-5: strongly agree