ArticlePrimary care companion to the Journal of clinical psychiatry2006
Randomized trial of the effect of research design and publication characteristics on physician change.
Article in Primary care companion to the Journal of clinical psychiatry, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Top 20 POEMs of the Past 20 Years: A Survey of Practice-Changing Research for Family Physicians.Annals of family medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe primary barrier to translation of research into practice relates to physician use of research. If we are to succeed at translating research into practice, we must understand to which research characteristics and publication formats practitioners attend.
objectiveTo determine which characteristics of research design (sample characteristics, study design) and publication (type of publication) are most influential on the acquisition of knowledge and change in behavior of family practitioners.
methodThis randomized clinical trial was conducted in family practice offices on the 305 family physicians who scored lowest on a survey of knowledge about management of major depressive disorder (MDD), panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Subjects were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 MDD abstracts differing in study site, 1 of 3 panic disorder abstracts differing in study design, and 1 of 3 GAD communications differing in format. The main outcome measures (knowledge and management strategies) were assessed immediately following the intervention and again 6 months later. Data for the intervention survey were gathered in November 2002.
resultsThis study found significant increases in knowledge level and use of first-line agents with all interventions; however, knowledge declined again after 6 months for both panic disorder and GAD. The only statistically significant interoption difference was that the POEM (patient-oriented evidence that matters) was associated with better retention of knowledge of the treatment of GAD.
conclusionIn conclusion, all interventions were associated with immediate increases in knowledge and use of first-line treatments. However, such gains were not retained for panic disorder and GAD. Except for better knowledge retention associated with POEM use, no consistent differences between intervention options were noted.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.