Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19948811›Full record

Trial reportCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne2009

Involving patients in cardiovascular risk management with nurse-led clinics: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Marije S Koelewijn-van Loon, Trudy van der Weijden, Ben van Steenkiste, Gaby Ronda, Bjorn Winkens, Johan L Severens, Michel Wensing, Glyn Elwyn, Richard Grol

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 11 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Nursing interventions for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  9. Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Marije S Koelewijn-van LoonCAPHRI School of Public Health and Primary Care, Department of General Practice, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands. M.Koelewijn@HAG.unimaas.nl
Trudy van der Weijden
Ben van Steenkiste
Gaby Ronda
Bjorn Winkens
Johan L Severens
Michel Wensing
Glyn Elwyn
Richard Grol

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreventive guidelines on cardiovascular risk management recommend lifestyle changes. Support for lifestyle changes may be a useful task for practice nurses, but the effect of such interventions in primary prevention is not clear. We examined the effect of involving patients in nurse-led cardiovascular risk management on lifestyle adherence and cardiovascular risk.

methodsWe performed a cluster randomized controlled trial in 25 practices that included 615 patients. The intervention consisted of nurse-led cardiovascular risk management, including risk assessment, risk communication, a decision aid and adapted motivational interviewing. The control group received a minimal nurse-led intervention. The self-reported outcome measures at one year were smoking, alcohol use, diet and physical activity. Nurses assessed 10-year cardiovascular mortality risk after one year.

resultsThere were no significant differences between the intervention groups. The effect of the intervention on the consumption of vegetables and physical activity was small, and some differences were only significant for subgroups. The effects of the intervention on the intake of fat, fruit and alcohol and smoking were not significant. We found no effect between the groups for cardiovascular 10-year risk.

interpretationNurse-led risk communication, use of a decision aid and adapted motivational interviewing did not lead to relevant differences between the groups in terms of lifestyle changes or cardiovascular risk, despite significant within-group differences.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Nurses'Alcohol DrinkingCardiovascular DiseasesCounselingDietExerciseFemaleHumansLife StyleMaleMiddle AgedRegression AnalysisRisk FactorsSmoking PreventionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID19948811
PMCPMC2789146

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.