Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23234237›Full record

Trial reportBMC family practice2012

Activating GENeral practitioners dialogue with patients on their Agenda (MultiCare AGENDA) study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.

Attila Altiner, Ingmar Schäfer, Christine Mellert, Christin Löffler, Achim Mortsiefer, Annette Ernst, Carl-Otto Stolzenbach, Birgitt Wiese, Martin Scherer, Hendrik van den Bussche and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC family practice, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Attila AltinerInstitute of General Practice, Medical Faculty, University of Rostock, Doberaner Str. 142, Rostock 18057, Germany.
Ingmar Schäfer
Christine Mellert
Christin Löffler
Achim Mortsiefer
Annette Ernst
Carl-Otto Stolzenbach
Birgitt Wiese
Martin Scherer
Hendrik van den Bussche
Hanna Kaduszkiewicz
Universität Hamburg · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEUniversity of Rostock · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study investigates the efficacy of a complex multifaceted intervention aiming at increasing the quality of care of GPs for patients with multimorbidity. In its core, the intervention aims at enhancing the doctor-patient-dialogue and identifying the patient's agenda and needs. Also, a medication check is embedded. Our primary hypothesis is that a more patient-centred communication will reduce the number of active pharmaceuticals taken without impairing the patients' quality of life. Secondary hypotheses include a better knowledge of GPs about their patients' medication, a higher patient satisfaction and a more effective and/or efficient health care utilization. METHODS/

designMulti-center, parallel group, cluster randomized controlled clinical trial in GP surgeries. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients aged 65-84 years with at least 3 chronic conditions.

interventionGPs allocated to this group will receive a multifaceted educational intervention on performing a narrative doctor-patient dialogue reflecting treatment targets and priorities of the patient and on performing a narrative patient-centred medication review. During the one year intervention GPs will have a total of three conversations à 30 minutes with the enrolled patients. CONTROL: Care as usual. Follow-up per patient: 14 months after baseline interview. Primary efficacy endpoints: Differences in medication intake and health related quality of life between baseline and follow-up in the intervention compared to the control group. Randomization: Computer-generated by an independent institute. It will be performed successively when patient recruitment in the respective surgery is finished. Blinding: Participants (GPs and patients) will not be blinded to their assignment but will be unaware of the study hypotheses or outcome measures. DISCUSSION: There is growing evidence that the phenomenon of polypharmacy and low quality of drug use is substantially due to mis-communication (or non-communication) in the doctor patient interaction. We assume that the number of pharmaceutical agents taken can be reduced by a communicational intervention and that this will not impair the patients' health-related quality of life. Improving communication is a core issue of future interventions, especially for patients with multimorbidity.

trial registrationCurrent CONTROLled Trials ISRCTN46272088.

Indexed as

Physician-Patient RelationsAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseCommunicationComorbidityFollow-Up StudiesGeneral PracticeGermanyHumansMedication ReconciliationOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Care PlanningPatient-Centered CarePatient ParticipationPatient Satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID23234237
PMCPMC3560077
OpenAlexW2051656165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.