Trial reportAnnals of family medicine2015
Overcoming challenges in the changing environment of practice-based research.
Trial report in Annals of family medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline implementation in the Canadian chiropractic setting: a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial and parallel study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Trial
- Barriers to smoking interventions in community healthcare settings: a scoping review.Health promotion international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeConducting studies in national practice-based research networks presents logistic and methodologic challenges. Pediatric Research in Office Settings (PROS) has learned valuable lessons in implementing new strategies and adapting to challenges. We describe practical challenges and results of novel applied strategies in implementing and testing the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) intervention as part of a national-level cluster-randomized controlled trial.
methodsIn the trial, 20 PROS practices were randomized to either a CEASE intervention arm or a control arm. Parents of children seen in the office who indicated smoking in the past 7 days were asked to complete a postvisit enrollment interview and telephone interviews 3 and 12 months later. Identified challenges included (1) recruiting 20 practices serving a high percentage of parent smokers; (2) screening all parents bringing children for visits and enrolling eligible parents who smoked; and (3) achieving an acceptable 12-month telephone response rate.
resultsA total of 47 interested practices completed the Practice Population Survey, of which 20 practices in 16 states completed parent enrollment. Thirty-two research assistants screened 18,607 parents and enrolled 1,980 of them. The initial telephone interview response rate was 56% at 12 months, with incorrect and disconnected numbers accounting for nearly 60% of nonresponses. The response rate rose to 67% after practices supplied 532 new contact numbers and 754 text messages were sent, with 389 parents completing interviews.
conclusionThe strategies we used to overcome methodologic barriers in conducting a national intervention trial allowed data collection to be completed in the office setting and increased the telephone interview response rate.
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.