Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2008
Electronic medical record-assisted design of a cluster-randomized trial to improve diabetes care and outcomes.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of computerized decision support systems on cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- Comparison of Two Electronic Systems for Obtaining Diabetes Care Indicators in Clinical Practice.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2021Article
- Evaluating a post-implementation electronic medical record training intervention for diabetes management in primary care.BMJ health & care informatics · 2019Article
- Comparative outcome studies of clinical decision support software: limitations to the practice of evidence-based system acquisition.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015Article
- Managing diabetes mellitus using information technology: a systematic review.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2015Article
- Hepatitis C: improving the quality of screening in a community hospital by implementing an electronic medical record intervention.BMJ quality improvement reports · 2015Article
- Blocking for Sequential Political Experiments.Political analysis : an annual publication of the Methodology Section of the American Political Science Association · 2013Article
- Moving health information technology forward.Journal of general internal medicine · 2008Article
- Using electronic medical records to measure and improve performance.Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundElectronic medical records (EMRs) have the potential to facilitate the design of large cluster-randomized trials (CRTs).
objectiveTo describe the design of a CRT of clinical decision support to improve diabetes care and outcomes.
methodsIn the Diabetes Improvement Group-Intervention Trial (DIG-IT), we identified and balanced preassignment characteristics of 12,675 diabetic patients cared for by 147 physicians in 24 practices of 2 systems using the same vendor's EMR. EMR-facilitated disease management was system A's experimental intervention; system B interventions involved patient empowerment, with or without disease management. For our sample, we: (1) identified characteristics associated with response to interventions or outcomes; (2) summarized feasible partitions of 10 system A practices (2 groups) and 14 system B practices (3 groups) using intra-cluster correlation coefficients (ICCs) and standardized differences; (3) selected (blinded) partitions to effectively balance the characteristics; and (4) randomly assigned groups of practices to interventions.
resultsIn System A, 4,306 patients, were assigned to 2 groups of practices; 8,369 patients in system B were assigned to 3 groups of practices. Nearly all baseline outcome variables and covariates were well-balanced, including several not included in the initial design. DIG-IT's balance was superior to alternative partitions based on volume, geography or demographics alone.
conclusionsEMRs facilitated rigorous CRT design by identifying large numbers of patients with diabetes and enabling fair comparisons through preassignment balancing of practice sites. Our methods can be replicated in other settings and for other conditions, enhancing the power of other translational investigations.
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.