Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2010
Automated electronic reminders to facilitate primary cardiovascular disease prevention: randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 10 of them syntheses 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital patient safety interventions in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Efficacy of sustained knowledge translation (KT) interventions in chronic disease management in older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions.BMC medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Are interventions to increase the uptake of screening for cardiovascular disease risk factors effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC family practice · 2017Pooled it
- Systematic versus opportunistic risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Clinical Decision Support Systems and Prevention: A Community Guide Cardiovascular Disease Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2015Pooled it
- Risks to patient safety associated with implementation of electronic applications for medication management in ambulatory care--a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2013Pooled it
- Changing clinical practice through patient specific reminders available at the time of the clinical encounter: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2012Pooled it
- The effects of on-screen, point of care computer reminders on processes and outcomes of care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
- Sustainability of an electronic technology-based intervention in general practice targeting improved detection and monitoring of the interrelated chronic vascular diseases.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Cardiovascular disease risk assessment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A scoping review.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Article
- The Impact of Meaningful Use and Electronic Health Records on Hospital Patient Safety.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Nudging healthcare professionals in clinical settings: a scoping review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Big data analytics for preventive medicine.Neural computing & applications · 2020Article
- General practitioners' reasoning on risk screening and primary prevention of stroke - a focus group study.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Engaging healthcare providers to implement HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2012Review
- Computer decision support tools in primary care.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care databases contain cardiovascular disease risk factor data, but practical tools are required to improve identification of at-risk patients.
aimTo test the effects of a system of electronic reminders (the 'e-Nudge') on cardiovascular events and the adequacy of data for cardiovascular risk estimation. DESIGN OF STUDY: Randomised controlled trial.
settingNineteen general practices in the West Midlands, UK.
methodThe e-Nudge identifies four groups of patients aged over 50 years on the basis of estimated cardiovascular risk and adequacy of risk factor data in general practice computers. Screen messages highlight individuals at raised risk and prompt users to complete risk profiles where necessary. The proportion of the study population in the four groups was measured, as well as the rate of cardiovascular events in each arm after 2 years.
resultsOver 38 000 patients' electronic records were randomised. The intervention led to an increase in the proportion of patients with sufficient data who were identifiably at risk, with a difference of 1.94% compared to the control group (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.38 to 2.50, P<0.001). A corresponding reduction occurred in the proportion potentially at risk but requiring further data for a risk estimation (difference = -3.68%, 95% CI = -4.53 to -2.84, P<0.001). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of cardiovascular events (rate ratio = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.10, P = 0.59).
conclusionAutomated electronic reminders using routinely collected primary care data can improve the adequacy of cardiovascular risk factor information during everyday practice and increase the visibility of the at-risk population.
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.