ArticlePopulation health management2011
Improving population care with an integrated electronic panel support tool.
Article in Population health management, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Collaborative development of a randomized study to adapt a diabetes quality improvement initiative for federally qualified health centers.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2012Trial
- Tailoring remote patient management in cardiovascular risk management for healthcare professionals using panel management: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Heart Failure Management Innovation Enabled by Electronic Health Records.JACC. Heart failure · 2020Review
- Innovative methods for parents and clinics to create tools for kids' care (IMPACCT Kids' Care) study protocol.Contemporary clinical trials · 2015Article
- In the Office and In-Between: The Role of Panel Management in Primary Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Article
- Improving care for older adults: a model to segment the senior population.The Permanente journal · 2014Article
- Electronic health records as a tool for recruitment of participants' clinical effectiveness research: lessons learned from tobacco cessation.Translational behavioral medicine · 2013Article
- Use of electronic health records and administrative data for public health surveillance of eye health and vision-related conditions in the United States.American journal of ophthalmology · 2012Article
- Effects of proactive population-based nephrologist oversight on progression of chronic kidney disease: a retrospective control analysis.BMC health services research · 2012Article
- A multi-perspective analysis of lessons learned from building an Integrated Care Coordination Information System (ICCIS).AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2012Article
- Pediatric palliative care and eHealth opportunities for patient-centered care.American journal of preventive medicine · 2011Article
- The impact of an electronic health record on nurse sensitive patient outcomes: an interrupted time series analysis.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAArticle
- Health information technology: an untapped resource to help keep patients insured.Annals of family medicineArticle
- A Simple Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Optimization Intervention for Health Care Providers Prescribing PrEP: Pilot Study.JMIR formative researchArticle
- Use of IndiGO individualized clinical guidelines in primary care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study measured the impact of an electronic Panel Support Tool (PST) on primary care teams' performance on preventive, monitoring, and therapeutic evidence-based recommendations. The PST, tightly integrated with a comprehensive electronic health record, is a dynamic report that identifies gaps in 32 evidence-based care recommendations for individual patients, groups of patients selected by a provider, or all patients on a primary care provider's panel. It combines point-of-care recommendations, disease registry capabilities, and continuous performance feedback for providers. A serial cross-sectional study of the PST's impact on care performance was conducted, retrospectively using monthly summary data for 207 teams caring for 263,509 adult members in Kaiser Permanente's Northwest region. Baseline care performance was assessed 3 months before first PST use and at 4-month intervals over 20 months of follow-up. The main outcome measure was a monthly care performance percentage for each provider, calculated as the number of selected care recommendations that were completed for all patients divided by the number of clinical indications for care recommendations among them. Statistical analysis was performed using the t test and multiple regression. Average baseline care performance on the 13 measures was 72.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.8%-74.0%). During the first 12 months of tool use, performance improved to a statistically significant degree every 4 months. After 20 months of follow-up, it increased to an average of 80.0% (95% CI, 79.3%-80.7%).
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.