Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11942445›Full record

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

A randomised controlled trial of the effect of educational outreach by community pharmacists on prescribing in UK general practice.

Nick Freemantle, Irwin Nazareth, Martin Eccles, John Wood, Andrew Haines, Evidence-based OutReach trialists

Erratum issuedAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyRandomized 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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 33 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Interventions for enhancing medication adherence.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Rationing decisions and the endowment effect.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2020
    Review
  16. Academic detailing as a method of continuing medical education.Advances in medical education and practice · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Patient-specific academic detailing for smoking cessation: feasibility study.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2014
    Article
  19. A brief overview of academic detailing in Canada: Another role for pharmacists.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC · 2012
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nick FreemantleDepartment of Primary Care and General Practice, The Medical School, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston. N.Freemantle@bham.ac.uk
Irwin Nazareth
Martin Eccles
John Wood
Andrew Haines
Evidence-based OutReach trialists

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEducational outreach visits are commonly used to promote changes in prescribing in family practice. However, the effectiveness of outreach visits has not been evaluated across a range of settings.

aimTo estimate the effectiveness of educational outreach visits on United Kingdom (UK) general practice prescribing and to examine the extent to which practice characteristics influenced outcome. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised controlled trial.

settingGeneral practices in 12 health authorities in England.

methodEducational outreach visits were made to practices that received two of four guidelines. Each practice provided data on treatment of patients for all four guidelines for both pre and post-intervention periods. The primary outcome is average effect across all four guidelines. Secondary analyses examined the predictive effect of practice and guideline characteristics.

resultsSeventy per cent of practices approached agreed to take part in the intervention. Overall, educational outreach was associated with a significant improvement in prescribing practice (odds ratio [OR] = 1.24 [95% CI = 1.07 to 1.42]), a 5.2% (95% CI = 1.7% to 8.7%) increase in the number of patients treated within the guideline recommendations. Smaller practices (two or fewer full-time equivalent practitioners) responded much more favourably to educational outreach than larger practices. Smaller practices improved their performance in line with the guidelines by 13.5% (95% CI = 6% to 20.9%) attributable to outreach, while larger practices improved by only 1.4% (95% CI = -2.4% to 5.3%, P-value for interaction <0.001).

conclusionIn large practices, educational outreach alone is unlikely to achieve worthwhile change. There is good evidence to support the use of educational outreach visits in small practices.

Indexed as

Community-Institutional RelationsCommunity Pharmacy ServicesDrug UtilizationEducation, Medical, ContinuingEnglandEvidence-Based MedicineFamily PracticeHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'State Medicine

Identifiers

PMID11942445
PMCPMC1314269

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.