Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12236277›Full record

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

Cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational outreach visit to improve influenza and pneumococcal immunisation rates in primary care.

A Niroshan Siriwardena, Aly Rashid, Mark R D Johnson, Michael E Dewey

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyRandomized 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, 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 26 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A Niroshan SiriwardenaDepartment of Health and Communityu Studies, De Montfort University, Leicester. niro@siriwardena.freeserve.co.uk
Aly Rashid
Mark R D Johnson
Michael E Dewey
De Montfort University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImprovement in the delivery of influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations to high-risk groups is an important aspect of preventive care for primary healthcare teams.

aimTo investigate the effect of an educational outreach visit to primary healthcare teams on influenza and pneumococcal vaccination uptake in high-risk patients.

designCluster randomised controlled trial.

settingThirty general practices in the Trent region, UK.

methodsFifteen practices were randomised to intervention and 15 to the control group after stratifying for baseline vaccination rate. All intervention practices were offered and received an educational outreach visit to primary healthcare teams, in addition to audit and feedback directed at improving influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates in high-risk groups. Control practices received audit and feedback alone. All practices measured influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates in high-risk groups. Primary outcomes were improvements in vaccination rates in patients aged 65 years and over, and patients with coronary heart disease (CHD), diabetes and a history of splenectomy.

resultsImprovements in pneumococcal vaccination rates in the intervention practices were significantly greater compared with controls in patients with CHD, 14.8% versus 6.5% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13 to 1.34) and diabetes, 15.5% versus 6.8% (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.08 to 1.29) but not splenectomy, 6.5% versus 4.7% (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.42). Improvements for influenza vaccination were also usually greater in intervention practices but did not reach statistical significance. The increases for influenza vaccination in intervention versus control practices were for CHD, 18.1% versus 13.1% (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.12); diabetes, 15.5% versus 12.0% (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.16), splenectomy 16.1% versus 2.9% (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.78 to 1.93); and those over 65 years 20.7% versus 25.4% (OR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.02).

conclusionPractices where primary care teams received an educational outreach visit demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in uptake in high-risk groups for pneumococcal but not influenza vaccine.

Indexed as

AgedDelivery of Health CareEnglandFamily PracticeHealth EducationHouse CallsHumansImmunizationImmunization ProgramsInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesPatient Acceptance of Health CarePneumococcal InfectionsPneumococcal VaccinesInfluenza VaccinesPneumococcal Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID12236277
PMCPMC1314414
OpenAlexW1820002660

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.