ArticleMedical care2013
Designing and implementing research on a statewide quality improvement initiative: the DIAMOND study and initiative.
Article in Medical care, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03000751 (CT Dose Optimization and Standardization Endeavor), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
CT Dose Optimization and Standardization Endeavor (DOSE) Collaboratory
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A stepped-wedge evaluation of an initiative to spread the collaborative care model for depression in primary care.Annals of family medicine · 2015Trial
- Patient and Staff Satisfaction and Experience While Transforming Health Center Systems.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2022Article
- A Statewide Effort to Implement Collaborative Care for Depression: Reach and Impact for All Patients With Depression.Medical care · 2016Article
- Stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: a review of the statistical methodology used and available.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Review
- The DIAMOND initiative: implementing collaborative care for depression in 75 primary care clinics.Implementation science : IS · 2013Article
- Mental health collaborative care and its role in primary care settings.Current psychiatry reports · 2013Review
- The 5 R's: an emerging bold standard for conducting relevant research in a changing world.Annals of family medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo demonstrate a rigorous methodology that optimally balanced internal validity with generalizability to evaluate a statewide collaborative that implemented an evidence-based, collaborative care model for depression management in primary care. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingSeveral operational features of the DIAMOND (Depression Improvement Across Minnesota, Offering a New Direction) Initiative suggested that the DIAMOND Study use a staggered implementation design with repeated cross-sections of patients across clinical settings. A multilevel recruitment strategy elicited virtually complete study participation from the medical groups, clinics, and health plans that coordinated efforts to deliver and reimburse DIAMOND care. Patient identification capitalized on large health plan claims databases to rapidly identify the population of patients newly treated for depression in DIAMOND clinics.
resultsThe staggered implementation design and multilevel recruitment strategy made it possible to evaluate DIAMOND by holding confounding factors constant and accurately identifying an intent-to-treat population of patients treated for depression without intruding on or requiring effort from their clinics.
conclusionsRecruitment and data collection from health plans, medical groups and clinics, and patients ensured a representative, intent-to-treat sample of study-enrolled patients. Separating patient identification from care delivery reduced threats of selection bias and enabled comparisons between the treated population and study sample. A key challenge is that intent-to-treat patients may not be exposed to DIAMOND which dilutes the effect size but offers realistic expectations of the impact of quality improvement in a population of treated patients.
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.