Trial reportTrials2013
Lessons learned from the conduct of a multisite cluster randomized practical trial of decision aids in rural and suburban primary care practices.
Trial report in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It reports registered trial NCT01029288. Cited by 4 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.
Impact of Decision Aids to Enhance Shared Decision Making for Diabetes
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What works to recruit general practices to trials? A rapid review.HRB open research · 2023Pooled it
- Strategies for recruitment in general practice settings: the iSOLVE fall prevention pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Trial
- Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece: a cluster randomised trial.BMJ open · 2016Trial
- Clinic Personnel, Facilitator, and Parent Perspectives of eHealth Familias Unidas in Primary Care.Journal of pediatric health care : official publication of National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & PractitionersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe decision aids for diabetes (DAD) trial explored the feasibility of testing the effectiveness of decision aids (DAs) about coronary prevention and diabetes medications in community-based primary care practices, including rural clinics that care for patients with type 2 diabetes.
methodsAs originally designed, we invited clinicians in eight practices to participate in the trial, reviewed the patient panel of clinicians who accepted our invitation for potentially eligible patients, and contacted these patients by phone, enrolling those who accepted our invitation. As enrollment failed to meet targets, we recruited four new practices. After discussing the study with the clinicians and receiving their support, we reviewed all clinic panels for potentially eligible patients. Clinicians were approached to confirm participation and patient eligibility, and patients were approached before their visit to provide written informed consent. This in-clinic approach required study coordinators to travel and stay longer at the clinics as well as to screen more patient records for eligibility. The in-clinic approach was associated with better recruitment rates, lower patient retention and outcome completion rates, and a better intervention effect.
resultsWe drew four lessons: 1) difficulties identifying potentially eligible patients threaten the viability of practical trials of DAs; 2) to improve the recruitment yield, recruit clinicians and patients for the study at the clinic, just before their visit; 3) approaches that improve recruitment may be associated with reduced retention and survey response; and 4) procedures that involve working closely with the practice may improve recruitment and may also affect the quality of the implementation of the interventions.
conclusionSuccess in practice-based trials in usual primary care including rural clinics may require the smallest possible research footprint on the practice while implementing a streamlined protocol favoring in-clinic, in-person interactions with clinicians and patients.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01029288.
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.