Patrick Michel Archambault*, Département de médecine familiale et médecine d'urgence, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada Tom H Van De Belt, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Division of Reproductive Medicine, Nijmegen, Netherlands Francisco J Grajales Iii*, eHealth Strategy Office, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada Marjan J Faber, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, Netherlands Andrea Bilodeau, Centre de santé et de services sociaux Alphonse-Desjardins (Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Lévis), Levis, Canada Simon Rioux, Centre de santé et de services sociaux Alphonse-Desjardins (Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Lévis), Levis, Canada Craig E Kuziemsky, Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada Gunther Eysenbach*, Centre for Global eHealth Innovation, University of Toronto and University Health Network, Toronto, Canada Karine Aubin, Faculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Québec, Canada Irving Gold, Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada, Ottawa, Canada Marie-pierre Gagnon*, Faculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada Alexis F Turgeon, Axe Traumatologie – Urgence – Soins Intensifs, Centre de recherche FRSQ du CHA universitaire de Québec, Quebec, Canada Julien Poitras, Département de médecine familiale et médecine d'urgence, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada Jan A.m. Kremer, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Division of Reproductive Medicine,, Nijmegen, Netherlands Marcel Heldoorn, Federation of Patients and Consumer Organisations in the Netherlands, Utrecht, Netherlands France Légaré, Canada Research Chair in Implementation of Shared Decision Making in Primary Care, Quebec, Canada Track: Research Presentation Topic: Wikis Presentation Type: Poster presentation Submission Type: Single Presentation Last modified: 2012-09-12

If you are the presenter of this abstract (or if you cite this abstract in a talk or on a poster), please show the QR code in your slide or poster (QR code contains this URL).

Background: The use of collaborative writing applications by clinicians and other health care actors is presently growing. Although wikis, Google Documents and similar collaborative writing applications may be useful in facilitating knowledge transfer, no systematic review has yet been conducted to evaluate their role in knowledge translation (KT).

Objective: This study is exploring the depth and breadth of evidence about the safe, effective and ethical use of collaborative writing applications. More specifically, our research question was articulated as follows: “What is the extent of the knowledge concerning the barriers to, the facilitators of, and the impacts of using collaborative writing applications as KT interventions in health care?

Methods: This review is based on the six stages of the Arksey and O’Malley framework for scoping reviews. First, to develop our research question and plan the stages of this review, we partnered with the International Medical Informatics Association, the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada and the Dutch Federation of Patients and Consumer Organizations. Second, we identified relevant studies within selected databases using the following search terms: “wiki,” “wikis,” “web 2.0,” “social media,” “Google Knol,” “Google Docs” and “collaborative writing applications”. The EPPI-Reviewer 4 software was used to manage the articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Eric and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

For the third stage, that we are currently conducting, we will include manuscripts relating to the use of “online collaborative writing applications” in health care, which we have defined as a category of social media that enables the joint and simultaneous editing of a web page or an online document by many end-users. Six reviewers are currently performing the screening in pairs. In case of disagreement about inclusion, a third reviewer will make the final decision. Based on qualitative content analysis of the included manuscripts, the fourth and fifth steps will consist of charting, collating, summarizing and reporting the results. Our final step will involve disseminating our results to the knowledge users involved in our project.

Results: After the removal of duplicates, a total of 4449 abstracts were identified. In the initial screening phase, the six reviewers screened the same 386 articles in order to verify and refine the selection criteria and meet inter-reliability standards. Included articles consist of literature reviews, editorials and empirical studies. Using the Knowledge to Action (KTA) Process Framework and based on our results, this presentation will describe the evidence of where and how different collaborative writing applications facilitate the KTA Process.

Conclusion: In health care, studies about the use of wikis and collaborative writing applications are increasing, as are the use of various methodologies and epistemological foundations that target the different stages of the KTA Process. Our ongoing scoping review will describe the current state of knowledge on this topic and will identify the gaps where further studies are needed. Also, the partnership and ongoing involvement of knowledge users will increase the incorporation of our findings into practice. At the conference, we will be able to present a preliminary synthesis of the retained articles.