Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20457555›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2010

Perspectives of family physicians on computer-assisted health-risk assessments.

Farah Ahmad, Harvey A Skinner, Donna E Stewart, Wendy Levinson

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00385034 (Computer-assisted Screening for Intimate Partner Violence in Family Practice - a Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

NCT00385034 nacompletednot on this map

Computer-assisted Screening for Intimate Partner Violence in Family Practice - a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUnity Health TorontoRan2005 to 2005Enrolled280ConditionsScreening for Partner ViolenceArmsInteractive computer based health-risk survey before doctor's visit
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Farah AhmadSocial and Behavioral Health Sciences Division, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. farah.ahmad@utoronto.ca
Harvey A Skinner
Donna E Stewart
Wendy Levinson
Public Health Ontario · CAUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAYork University · CA

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research FOW 68219Canadian Institutes of Health Research IGF 63976
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe firsthand experience of physicians using computer-assisted health-risk assessment is salient for designing practical eHealth solutions.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to enhance understanding about computer-assisted health-risk assessments from physicians' perspectives after completion of a trial at a Canadian, urban, multi-doctor, hospital-affiliated family practice clinic.

methodsA qualitative approach of face-to-face, in-depth, semi-structured interviews was used. All interviews were audio recorded and field notes taken. Analytic induction and constant comparative techniques were used for coding and analyses. Interpretation was facilitated by peer audit and insights gained from the social exchange theoretical perspective.

resultsTen physicians (seven female and three male) participated in the interviews. Three overarching themes emerged in relation to computer-assisted health-risk assessments: (1) perceived benefits, (2) perceived concerns or challenges, and (3) feasibility. Physicians unanimously acknowledged the potential of computer-assisted health-risk assessments to open dialogue on psychosocial health risks. They also appreciated the general facilitative roles of the tool, such as improving time-efficiency by asking questions on health risks prior to the consultation and triggering patients' self-reflections on the risks. However, in the context of ongoing physician-patient relationships, physicians expressed concerns about the impact of the computer-assisted health-risk assessment tool on visit time, patient readiness to talk about psychosocial issues when the purpose of the visit was different, and the suitability of such risk assessment for all visits to detect new risk information. In terms of feasibility, physicians displayed general acceptance of the risk assessment tool but considered it most feasible for periodic health exams and follow-up visits based on their perceived concerns or challenges and the resources needed to implement such programs. These included clinic level (staff training, space, confidentiality) and organizational level (time, commitment and finances) support.

conclusionsParticipants perceived computer-assisted health-risk assessment as a useful tool in family practice, particularly for identifying psychosocial issues. Physicians displayed a general acceptance of the computer tool and indicated its greater feasibility for periodic health exams and follow-up visits than all visits. Future physician training on psychosocial issues should address physicians' concerns by emphasizing the varying forms of "clinical success" for the management of chronic psychosocial issues. Future research is needed to examine the best ways to implement this program in diverse clinical settings and patient populations.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00385034; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00385034 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/5pV8AGRgt).

Indexed as

Decision Making, Computer-AssistedHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth Status IndicatorsAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOntarioPhysicians, FamilyPopulation SurveillanceRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID20457555
PMCPMC2885781
OpenAlexW2020947353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.