Table 2.

Cross-sectional survey to generate and rate desirable GItool features (n = 96)

GItool feature	Rating (n,%)
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	Unsure	6 + 7
1. Tool objectives are stated	0	1	0	2	5	22	66	0	88
	0.0	1.0	0.0	2.1	5.2	22.9	65.3	0.0	91.7
2. Target users of tool are identified	0	1	1	4	6	19	65	0	84
	0.0	1.0	1.0	4.2	6.3	19.8	67.8	0.0	87.5
3. Tool development is clearly described	0	1	6	5	20	17	45	2	62
	0.0	1.0	6.3	5.2	20.8	17.7	46.9	2.1	64.6
4. Evidence is cited that underpins tool design, development, content	1	0	4	12	11	19	49	0	68
	1.0	0.0	4.2	12.5	11.5	19.8	51.0	0.0	70.8
5. Quantity and quality of underpinning evidence is described	1	2	2	15	12	22	40	2	62
	1.0	2.1	2.1	15.6	12.5	22.9	41.7	2.1	64.6
6. Development involved pre-testing (gathering stakeholder needs and suggestions by interview, focus group, survey, etc.)	3	2	0	6	13	29	39	4	68
	3.1	2.1	0.0	6.3	13.5	30.2	40.6	4.2	70.8
7. Development involved pilot-testing with stakeholders to assess use and satisfaction, and then improve the tool	1	3	2	3	11	25	46	5	71
	1.0	3.1	2.1	3.1	11.5	26.0	47.9	5.2	74.0
8. Development involved full-scale evaluation with a larger sample of stakeholders to thoroughly/rigorously assess impact	1	2	9	12	24	19	23	6	42
	1.0	2.1	9.4	12.5	25.0	19.8	24.0	6.3	43.8
9. Once implemented, user feedback is prospectively collected to monitor tool use and impact	0	1	3	4	14	30	42	2	72
	0.0	1.0	3.1	4.2	14.6	31.3	43.8	2.1	75.0