Trial reportBMJ open2016
General practitioners' justifications for therapeutic inertia in cardiovascular prevention: an empirically grounded typology.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00348855 (Effects of a Series of Intensified Prevention Consultations on the Changes in Goals and Risk Factors in Hypertensive Patients at High Cardiovascular Risk), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 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.
Effects of a Series of Intensified Prevention Consultations on the Changes in Goals and Risk Factors in Hypertensive Patients at High Cardiovascular Risk
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- I Brazilian guideline on hypertension in dialysis of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaGuideline
- Impact of the National Essential Public Health Service Package on Blood Pressure Control in Chinese People With Hypertension: Retrospective Population-Based Longitudinal Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Testing interventions to reduce clinical inertia in the treatment of hypertension: rationale and design of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.American heart journal · 2024Article
- World Heart Federation Roadmap for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: 2023 Update.Global heart · 2024Article
- Attitudes of General Practitioners Toward Prescription of Mobile Health Apps: Qualitative Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- Fixed-Dose Combination Medications for Treating Hypertension: A Review of Effectiveness, Safety, and Challenges.Current hypertension reports · 2020Review
- Comparison of Physician Therapeutic Inertia for Management of Patients With Multiple Sclerosis in Canada, Argentina, Chile, and Spain.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Implementation of home blood pressure monitoring among French GPs: A long and winding road.PloS one · 2019Article
- Clinical inertia and the 2017 ACA/AHA guideline.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Prevalence of primary aldosteronism in primary care: a cross-sectional study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Article
- Impact of Sustained Use of a Multifaceted Computerized Quality Improvement Intervention for Cardiovascular Disease Management in Australian Primary Health Care.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Observational
- Overcoming Therapeutic Inertia in Multiple Sclerosis Care: A Pilot Randomized Trial Applying the Traffic Light System in Medical Education.Frontiers in neurology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo construct a typology of general practitioners' (GPs) responses regarding their justification of therapeutic inertia in cardiovascular primary prevention for high-risk patients with hypertension.
designEmpirically grounded construction of typology. Types were defined by attributes derived from the qualitative analysis of GPs' reported reasons for inaction.
participants256 GPs randomised in the intervention group of a cluster randomised controlled trial.
settingGPs members of 23 French Regional Colleges of Teachers in General Practice, included in the EffectS of a multifaceted intervention on CArdiovascular risk factors in high-risk hyPErtensive patients (ESCAPE) trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The database consisted of 2638 written responses given by the GPs to an open-ended question asking for the reasons why drug treatment was not changed as suggested by the national guidelines. All answers were coded using constant comparison analysis. A matrix analysis of codes per GP allowed the construction of a response typology, where types were defined by codes as attributes. Initial coding and definition of types were performed independently by two teams.
resultsInitial coding resulted in a list of 69 codes in the final codebook, representing 4764 coded references in the question responses. A typology including seven types was constructed. 100 GPs were allocated to one and only one of these types, while 25 GPs did not provide enough data to allow classification. Types (numbers of GPs allocated) were: 'optimists' (28), 'negotiators' (20), 'checkers' (15), 'contextualisers' (13), 'cautious' (11), 'rounders' (8) and 'scientists' (5). For the 36 GPs that provided 50 or more coded references, analysis of the code evolution over time and across patients showed a consistent belonging to the initial type for any given GP.
conclusionThis typology could provide GPs with some insight into their general ways of considering changes in the treatment/management of cardiovascular risk factors and guide design of specific physician-centred interventions to reduce inappropriate inaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00348855.
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.