Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20416080›Full record

Trial reportTrials2010

Evaluation of a toolkit to improve cardiovascular disease screening and treatment for people with type 2 diabetes: protocol for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial.

Baiju R Shah, Onil Bhattacharyya, Catherine Yu, Muhammad Mamdani, Janet A Parsons, Sharon E Straus, Merrick Zwarenstein

Open access · goldFull text readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Scoping review of toolkits as a knowledge translation strategy in health.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2014
    Article
  9. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Baiju R ShahUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. baiju.shah@ices.on.ca
Onil Bhattacharyya
Catherine Yu
Muhammad Mamdani
Janet A Parsons
Sharon E Straus
Merrick Zwarenstein
University of Toronto · CAHealth Sciences Centre · CASt. Michael's Hospital · CASunnybrook Research Institute

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe gap between the level of care recommended by evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and the actual care delivered to patients in practice has been well established. The Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) created an implementation strategy to improve the implementation of its 2008 guidelines. This study will evaluate the impact of the strategy to improve cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening, prevention and treatment for people with diabetes.

designA pragmatic cluster-randomized trial will be conducted to evaluate the CDA's CVD Toolkit. All family physicians in Ontario, Canada were randomly allocated to receive the Toolkit, which includes several printed educational materials targeting CVD screening, prevention and treatment, either in spring 2009 (intervention arm) or in spring 2010 (control arm). Randomization occurred at the level of the practice. Forty family physicians from each arm will be recruited to participate, and the medical records for 20 of their diabetic patients at high risk for CVD will be retrospectively reviewed. Outcome measures will be assessed for each patient between July 2009 and March 2010. The primary outcome will be that the patient is receiving a statin. Secondary outcomes will include 1) the receipt of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, 2) various intermediate measures (A1c, blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol, total-/HDL-cholesterol ratio, body mass index and waist circumference), and 3) clinical inertia (the failure to change therapy in response to an abnormal A1c, blood pressure or cholesterol reading). The analysis will be carried out using multilevel hierarchical logistic regression models to account for the clustered nature of the data. The group assignment will be a physician-level variable. In addition, a process evaluation study with six focus groups of family physicians will assess the acceptability of the CDA's Toolkit and will explore factors contributing to any change or lack of change in behaviour, from the perspectives of family physicians. DISCUSSION: Printed educational materials for physicians have been shown to exert small-to-moderate changes in patient care. The CDA's CVD Toolkit is an example of a practice guideline implementation strategy that can be disseminated to a wide audience relatively inexpensively, and so demonstrating its effectiveness at improving diabetes care could have important consequences for guideline developers, policy makers and clinicians.

Indexed as

Family PracticeHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePamphletsAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin II Type 1 Receptor BlockersAttitude of Health PersonnelCardiovascular AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesCluster AnalysisDecision Support TechniquesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Guideline AdherenceHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsLogistic ModelsMass ScreeningAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin II Type 1 Receptor BlockersCardiovascular AgentsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID20416080
PMCPMC2867980
OpenAlexW1968234828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
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.