Skip to main content

Table 1 Users’ experiences using rapid response briefs

From: Policymaker experiences with rapid response briefs to address health-system and technology questions in Uganda

Domain Issues raised (illustrated with quotes where possible) What we changed
Major problems Big problems or frustrations Minor issues Positive feedback Specific suggestions
Findability (the extent to which the product is navigable and the user can locate and easily find what they need) • None • A lot of information on the first page
• Too many logos on the face/first page
• Too many key messages – preference for only one or two
• Distracting information box(es) especially on the first page
• A dislike for headings presented in form of questions
• Headings, colours, formatting, font are clear enough
• Use of tables to summarise findings
• A good balance between precision and detail of information
• Reduce information on the first/face page
• Use a style that allows for citation to show in the text not at the end • More use of figures and less of text
• Only main logos left on front page, others moved to the back
• Logos made smaller
• No set number of key messages but instruction to keep these to a minimum
• Revised what information would be on page one
• Some information boxes moved to other pages
Usability (the ease of use of a product) • None • The report seemed lengthy
• The methodology of how the report was prepared being in a small information box on the second page was easily missed
• The absence of recommendations
• None • A background section that sets the context of the report
• The small size of the document
• Decision options were presented clearly
• The conclusion was clear
• Key messages were well linked to the approaches or options provided and discussed later, which made it easy to follow
• Information boxes were helpful in providing guidance on what to find in the report
• Aim to restrict text under a given subheading to the same page and not spill over to the next
• Key messages should not simply be bullet points they should have a little more detail
• Keep only important references
• Report should aim at 5–7 pages
• Reference to the methodology to be included in the main text, in the background whenever possible (considering a balance with size of the document)
Usefulness (the extent to which the product fills a need that the user had) • None • The absence of recommendations or a clear way forward • None • All participants found the reports useful for themselves and others • The provision of recommendations • Communications to rapid response service team to give more time to explaining the absence of recommendations (in report and during interaction)
Accessibility (the ease with which the product is available to all users including those with different preferences or disabilities) • None • None • None • Generally found accessible “…yeah I think, everyone, okay at least a good percentage can use this document without a problem • None • No changes made to the template
Credibility (the extent to which the users trust and believe what is presented to them and what elements of the product influence this trust) • None • None • None • Credibility attached to the research institution and partners (as identified by the logos)
• Referencing using credible and trusted sources
• Provision of contact information to follow up on the report and its content
• None • No changes made to the template
Understandability (understanding (or recognising) the document category and understanding the document content) • None • Poor initial understanding of the type of document and its potential uses • Unclear reference to methods used to prepare the document • Simple language • None • Revision of information in the information boxes
Desirability (how much appreciation is drawn from the user by the power and value of the image, identity, brand, and other elements of emotional design) • None • None • None I love the report especially the background. Also it is not very long so it is readable…
Very desirable, we hope this service will not end
• Presentation of recommendations • No changes made to the template
Value • None • None … the writing seems ‘laborious’. …you are spending a lot on describing yourselves…
Make the reports/reports more accessible for those other than those who requested for it…
• None • Increase visibility of the products through different kinds of dissemination • Less information about partners and all of it moved to the back of the document
• Decision to increase visibility with caution; need to balance demand with capacity to meet it