Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11885833›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2002

A pragmatic randomised controlled trial of a prompt and reminder card in the care of people with epilepsy.

Ajay Thapar, Ann Jacoby, Alan Richens, Ian Russell, Chris Roberts, Elaine Porter, Sonia Wall, Martin Roland

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Patient-mediated interventions to improve professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Care delivery and self management strategies for adults with epilepsy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. How to change clinical behaviour: no answers yet.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2003
    Article
  7. Confidentiality: consent is not sufficient.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2003
    Article
  8. Efforts to ban direct-to-consumer advertising in New Zealand: a call to action.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2003
    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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ajay ThaparDepartment of General Practice, University of Manchester. thaparak@cf.ac.uk
Ann Jacoby
Alan Richens
Ian Russell
Chris Roberts
Elaine Porter
Sonia Wall
Martin Roland
University of Manchester · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G9810900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe quality of epilepsy care has often been noted to be poor and fragmentary. Most people with epilepsy are solely under the care of their general practitioner (GP). Many patients report medication side-effects and poor seizure control. Most GPs accept responsibility for epilepsy care; however, many report problems with knowledge of epilepsy and nearly all support guidance on epilepsy management.

aimTo determine whether a GP-completed prompt and reminder card is effective in improving the quality of epilepsy care when used opportunistically. DESIGN OF STUDY: Primary care-based pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial.

settingPeople with active epilepsy (n = 1275) from 82 practices.

methodPractices were randomly categorised as 'control', 'doctor-held card' (card in patient records), or 'patient-held card' practices.

resultsCompared with control practices, recording of seizure frequency was significantly increased in doctor-held card practices (57.4% versus 42.8%, P = 0.003) but not in patient-held card practices (44.6% versus 42.8%). No differences were found in the proportion of seizure-free patients (doctor-held card [56.0%] versus control [51.5%]; patient-held card [58.1%] versus control [51.5%]) or in the proportion on monotherapy. Patients in both intervention groups reported more medication-related side-effects and patients in doctor-held card practices were less satisfied with information provision about epilepsy. Participating GPs found the card useful. The doctor-held card was retrieved and completed more often than the patient-held card.

conclusionsA doctor-held prompt and reminder card is effective in improving the recording of key clinical information for people with epilepsy, is felt to be useful by GPs, and is completed more often than a patient-held card. However it does not improve outcomes and may result in less patient-centred care.

Indexed as

Family PracticeAttitude of Health PersonnelEpilepsyFemaleHealth Services ResearchHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPractice Guidelines as TopicQuality of Health CareReminder Systems

Identifiers

PMID11885833
PMCPMC1314230
OpenAlexW2130469536

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.