Trial reportTrials2012
Study protocol of a mixed-methods evaluation of a cluster randomized trial to improve the safety of NSAID and antiplatelet prescribing: data-driven quality improvement in primary care.
Trial report in Trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01425502 (Data-driven Quality Improvement in Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Data-driven Quality Improvement in Primary Care: Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial to Test the Effectiveness of a Multifaceted Intervention in Reducing High Risk Prescribing of Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs and Antiplatelet Agents
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What do we want to get out of this? a critical interpretive synthesis of the value of process evaluations, with a practical planning framework.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Process evaluation of the data-driven quality improvement in primary care (DQIP) trial: active and less active ingredients of a multi-component complex intervention to reduce high-risk primary care prescribing.Implementation science : IS · 2017Trial
- Trial
- Article
- Using Normalization Process Theory to Evaluate an End-of-Life Pediatric Palliative Care Web-Based Training Program for Nurses: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Designing process evaluations using case study to explore the context of complex interventions evaluated in trials.Trials · 2020Review
- Article
- Article
- Article
- A practical Bayesian stepped wedge design for community-based cluster-randomized clinical trials: The British Columbia Telehealth Trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTrials of complex interventions are criticized for being 'black box', so the UK Medical Research Council recommends carrying out a process evaluation to explain the trial findings. We believe it is good practice to pre-specify and publish process evaluation protocols to set standards and minimize bias. Unlike protocols for trials, little guidance or standards exist for the reporting of process evaluations. This paper presents the mixed-method process evaluation protocol of a cluster randomized trial, drawing on a framework designed by the authors. METHODS/
designThis mixed-method evaluation is based on four research questions and maps data collection to a logic model of how the data-driven quality improvement in primary care (DQIP) intervention is expected to work. Data collection will be predominately by qualitative case studies in eight to ten of the trial practices, focus groups with patients affected by the intervention and quantitative analysis of routine practice data, trial outcome and questionnaire data and data from the DQIP intervention. DISCUSSION: We believe that pre-specifying the intentions of a process evaluation can help to minimize bias arising from potentially misleading post-hoc analysis. We recognize it is also important to retain flexibility to examine the unexpected and the unintended. From that perspective, a mixed-methods evaluation allows the combination of exploratory and flexible qualitative work, and more pre-specified quantitative analysis, with each method contributing to the design, implementation and interpretation of the other.As well as strengthening the study the authors hope to stimulate discussion among their academic colleagues about publishing protocols for evaluations of randomized trials of complex interventions. DATA-DRIVEN QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN PRIMARY CARE
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01425502.
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.