ArticlePediatrics2014
Maintenance of Certification Part 4 Credit and recruitment for practice-based research.
Article in Pediatrics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delivery and Impact of a Motivational Intervention for Smoking Cessation: A PROS Study.Pediatrics · 2020Trial
- Exploring paediatricians' experiences with performance improvement modules and quality improvement.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- Engaging faculty in a workshop intervention on overcoming the influence of implicit bias.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Adapting practice-based intervention research to electronic environments: opportunities and complexities at two institutions.EGEMS (Washington, DC) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCompeting priorities in pediatric practice have created challenges for practice-based research. To increase recruitment success, researchers must design studies that provide added value to participants. This study evaluates recruitment of pediatricians into a study, before and after the development and addition of a quality improvement (QI) curriculum approved for American Board of Pediatrics Maintenance of Certification (MOC) Part 4 Credit as an enrollment incentive.
methodsResearchers implemented multiple outreach methods to enroll pediatric practices over 28 months. Field note review revealed that many physicians declined enrollment, stating that they prioritized MOC Part 4 projects over research studies. A QI curriculum meeting standards for MOC Part 4 Credit was developed and added to the study protocol as an enrollment incentive. Enrollment rates and characteristics of practitioners enrolled pre- and post-MOC were compared.
resultsPre-MOC enrollment contributed 48% of practices in 22 months; post-MOC enrollment contributed 49% of practices in 6 months. An average of 3.5 practices enrolled per month pre-MOC, compared with 13.1 per month post-MOC (P < .001). Clinicians in pre- and post-MOC groups were similar in age, gender, race, and time spent on patient care; practices enrolled post-MOC were more likely to be located in federally designated Medically Underserved Areas than those enrolled pre-MOC (28.6% vs 12%, P = .03).
conclusionsAddition of MOC Part 4 Credit increased recruitment success and increased enrollment of pediatricians working in underserved areas. Including QI initiatives meeting MOC Part 4 criteria in practice-based research protocols may enhance participation and aid in recruiting diverse practice and patient populations.
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.