Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24590734›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2014

Comparative effectiveness of audit-feedback versus additional physician communication training to improve cancer screening for patients with limited health literacy.

Eboni G Price-Haywood, Jewel Harden-Barrios, Lisa A Cooper

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01361035 (Using Effective Provider-Patient Communication to Improve Cancer Screening Among Low Literacy Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 30 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01361035 nacompletednot on this map

Using Effective Provider-Patient Communication to Improve Cancer Screening Among Low Literacy Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorTulane University School of MedicineRan2008 to 2012Enrolled168ConditionsCervical Cancer, Breast Cancer, Colorectal CancerArmsCancer risk communication skills training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Eboni G Price-HaywoodDepartment of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, 1430 Tulane Avenue, SL-16, New Orleans, LA, 70112, USA, eprice@tulane.edu.
Jewel Harden-Barrios
Lisa A Cooper

Funding

TRAINING COREP50HL105187 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GOLDEN, SHERITA HILL · 2010 to 2014
$9.8M
Patient-Oriented Research in Cardiovascular DisparitiesK24HL083113 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI COOPER, LISA A · 2006 to 2015
$2.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL083113NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL83113NHLBI NIH HHS P50 HL0105187NHLBI NIH HHS P50 HL105187
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe designed a continuing medical education (CME) program to teach primary care physicians (PCP) how to engage in cancer risk communication and shared decision making with patients who have limited health literacy (HL).

objectiveWe evaluated whether training PCPs, in addition to audit-feedback, improves their communication behaviors and increases cancer screening among patients with limited HL to a greater extent than only providing clinical performance feedback.

designFour-year cluster randomized controlled trial.

participantsEighteen PCPs and 168 patients with limited HL who were overdue for colorectal/breast/cervical cancer screening.

interventionsCommunication intervention PCPs received skills training that included standardized patient (SP) feedback on counseling behaviors. All PCPs underwent chart audits of patients' screening status semiannually up to 24 months and received two annual performance feedback reports. MAIN MEASURES: PCPs experienced three unannounced SP encounters during which SPs rated PCP communication behaviors. We examined between-group differences in changes in SP ratings and patient knowledge of cancer screening guidelines over 12 months; and changes in patient cancer screening rates over 24 months. KEY

resultsThere were no group differences in SP ratings of physician communication at baseline. At follow-up, communication intervention PCPs were rated higher in general communication about cancer risks and shared decision making related to colorectal cancer screening compared to PCPs who only received performance feedback. Screening rates increased among patients of PCPs in both groups; however, there were no between-group differences in screening rates except for mammography. The communication intervention did not improve patient cancer screening knowledge.

conclusionCompared to audit and feedback alone, including PCP communication training increases PCP patient-centered counseling behaviors, but not cancer screening among patients with limited HL. Larger studies must be conducted to determine whether lack of changes in cancer screening were due to clinic/patient sample size versus ineffectiveness of communication training to change outcomes.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAgedCluster AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerEducation, Medical, ContinuingFeedback, PsychologicalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMedical AuditMiddle AgedTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24590734
PMCPMC4099465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.