Trial reportBMC health services research2007
Knowledge translation on dementia: a cluster randomized trial to compare a blended learning approach with a "classical" advanced training in GP quality circles.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Teaching differential diagnosis in primary care using an inverted classroom approach: student satisfaction and gain in skills and knowledge.BMC medical education · 2015Article
- Using developmental research to design innovative knowledge translation technology for spinal cord injury in primary care: Actionable Nuggets™ on SkillScribe™.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2014Article
- Assessing dementia in resource-poor regions.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2012Review
- Knowledge transfer for the management of dementia: a cluster randomised trial of blended learning in general practice.Implementation science : IS · 2010Article
- [Development and implementation of the dementia guideline of the German Society of General Practice and Family Medicine].Medizinische Klinik (Munich, Germany : 1983) · 2010Article
- [Stigma and taboo in dementia care - does continuing education for GPs and nurses contribute to destigmatisation].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2009Article
- General Practitioners' preferences and use of educational media: a German perspective.BMC health services research · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThus far important findings regarding the dementia syndrome have been implemented into patients' medical care only inadequately. A professional training accounting for both, general practitioners' (GP) needs and learning preferences as well as care-relevant aspects could be a major step towards improving medical care. In the WIDA-study, entitled "Knowledge translation on dementia in general practice" two different training concepts are developed, implemented and evaluated. Both concepts are building on an evidence-based, GP-related dementia guideline and communicate the guideline's essential insights. METHODS/
designBoth development and implementation emphasize a procedure that is well-accepted in practice and, thus, can achieve a high degree of external validity. This is particularly guaranteed through the preparation of training material and the fact that general practitioners' quality circles (QC) are addressed. The evaluation of the two training concepts is carried out by comparing two groups of GPs to which several quality circles have been randomly assigned. The primary outcome is the GPs' knowledge gain. Secondary outcomes are designed to indicate the training's potential effects on the GPs' practical actions. In the first training concept (study arm A) GPs participate in a structured case discussion prepared for by internet-based learning material ("blended-learning" approach). The second training concept (study arm B) relies on frontal medical training in the form of a slide presentation and follow-up discussion ("classical" approach). DISCUSSION: This paper presents the outline of a cluster-randomized trial which has been peer reviewed and support by a national funding organization--Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)--and is approved by an ethics commission. The data collection has started in August 2006 and the results will be published independently of the study's outcome.
trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials [ISRCTN36550981].
Indexed as
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.