Trial reportTrials2015
Improving quality of care and long-term health outcomes through continuity of care with the use of an electronic or paper patient-held portable health file (COMMUNICATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01082978 (A Randomized Controlled Trial of Portable Electronic), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Portable Electronic(USB)and Paper Medical Records as an Adjunct to Usual Care (Portable Health File RCT): an Evaluation of Short Term Quality Measures and Long-term Clinical Outcomes
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions for improving outcomes in patients with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Interventions for improving outcomes in patients with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- A qualitative assessment of nonclinical drivers of pediatric outpatient antibiotic prescribing: The importance of continuity.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022Article
- How can patient-held lists of medication enhance patient safety? A mixed-methods study with a focus on user experience.BMJ quality & safety · 2020Article
- Article
- Health Information Technology in Healthcare Quality and Patient Safety: Literature Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe advantages of patient-held portable health files (PHF) and personal health records (PHR), paper or electronic, are said to include improved health-care provider continuity-of-care and patient empowerment in maintaining health. Top-down approaches are favored by public sector government and health managers. Bottom-up approaches include systems developed directly by health-care providers, consumers and industry, implemented locally on devices carried by patient-consumers or shared via web-based portals. These allow individuals to access, manage and share their health information, and that of others for whom they are authorized, in a private, secure and confidential environment. Few medical record technologies have been evaluated in randomized trials to determine whether there are important clinical benefits of these interventions. The COMMUNICATE trial will assess the acceptability and long-term clinical outcomes of an electronic and paper patient-held PHF. METHODS/
designThis is a 48-month, open-label pragmatic, superiority, parallel-group design randomized controlled trial. Subjects (n = 792) will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to each of the trial arms: the electronic PHF added to usual care, the paper PHF added to usual care and usual care alone (no PHF). Inclusion criteria include those 60 years or older living independently in the community, but who have two or more chronic medical conditions that require prescription medication and regular care by at least three medical practitioners (general and specialist care). The primary objective is whether use of a PHF compared to usual care reduces a combined endpoint of deaths, overnight hospitalizations and blindly adjudicated serious out-of-hospital events. All primary analyses will be undertaken masked to randomized arm allocation using intention-to-treat principles. Secondary outcomes include quality of life and health literacy improvements. DISCUSSION: Lack of blinding creates potential for bias in trial conduct and ascertainment of clinical outcomes. Mechanisms are provided to reduce bias, including balanced study contact with all participants, a blinded adjudication committee determining which out-of-hospital events are serious and endpoints that are objective (overnight hospitalizations and mortality). The PRECIS tool provides a summary of the trial's design on the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum.
trial registrationRegistered with Clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT01082978) on 8 March 2010.
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.