Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10756609›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1999

A randomized trial of three marketing strategies to disseminate a screening and brief alcohol intervention programme to general practitioners.

C A Lock, E F Kaner, N Heather, B R McAvoy, E Gilvarry

Abstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Changes in receptionists' attitudes towards involvement in a general practice-based trial of screening and brief alcohol intervention.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2000
    Trial
  4. A RCT of three training and support strategies to encourage implementation of screening and brief alcohol intervention by general practitioners.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1999
    Trial
  5. Patient and practitioner characteristics predict brief alcohol intervention in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2001
    Article
  6. Changing the culture?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2001
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

C A LockDepartment of Primary Health Care, School of Health Sciences, Medical School, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. c.a.lock@newcastle.ac.uk
E F Kaner
N Heather
B R McAvoy
E Gilvarry

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch findings are of little benefit to patients or society if they do not reach the audience they are intended to influence. A dissemination strategy is needed to target new findings at its user group and encourage a process of consideration and adoption or rejection.

aimTo evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different marketing strategies for the dissemination of a screening and brief alcohol intervention (SBI) programme to general practitioners (GPs).

methodSeven hundred and twenty-nine GPs, one per practice, from the former Northern and Yorkshire Regional Health Authority were randomly assigned to one of three marketing strategies: postal marketing (mailing a promotional brochure to GPs), telemarketing (following a script to market the programme over the telephone), and personal marketing (following the same script during face-to-face marketing at GPs' practices). GPs who took up the programme were asked if they would agree to use it. Outcome measures included the proportions of GPs who took up the programme and agreement to use it.

resultsOf the 614 GPs eligible for the study, 321 (52%) took the programme. There was a significant difference in the proportions of GPs from the three marketing strategies who took the programme (82% telemarketing, 68% personal marketing, and 22% postal marketing). Of the 315 GPs who took the programme and were eligible to use it, 128 (41%) agreed to use the programme for three months. GPs in the postal marketing group were more likely to agree to use the programme (55% postal marketing, 44% personal marketing, and 34% telemarketing). Personal marketing was the most effective overall dissemination strategy; however, economic analysis revealed that telemarketing was the most cost-effective strategy. Costs for dissemination per GP were: 13 Pounds telemarketing, 15 Pounds postal marketing, and 88 Pounds personal marketing.

conclusionTelemarketing appeared to be the most cost-effective strategy for dissemination of SBI to GPs.

Indexed as

Family PracticeAlcohol DrinkingCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandHumansMarketing of Health ServicesMass ScreeningProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID10756609
PMCPMC1313495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.