Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27442712›Full record

ArticleJournal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality

Use of Newly Covered Versus Established Preventive Care Screening: Comparison of Depression and Smoking Screening.

Elizabeth R Pfoh, Zackary Berger, Ramin Mojtabai, Jenny Bailey, Sydney M Dy

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal for healthcare quality : official publication of the National Association for Healthcare Quality. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Elizabeth R Pfoh
Zackary Berger
Ramin Mojtabai
Jenny Bailey
Sydney M Dy

Funding

AHRQ HHS T32 HS000029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pay-for-value initiatives include both depression and smoking screening. Evaluating how patterns of care differ for an established screening (smoking) versus newer screening (depression) can help programs better implement these measures. Our objective is to evaluate (1) patterns of smoking and depression screening and (2) how patient factors affect screening patterns. We analyzed retrospectively collected electronic health record data from 4,763 Medicare-patients in 34 primary care practices between 2010 and 2012. The relationship between multimorbidity, history of stroke, and having depression on receipt of screening was evaluated. The outcome variables were no screening, smoking screening only, or concurrent smoking and depression screening. Fifty percent of patients were screened for smoking at every visit and never screened for depression (n = 2,378). Twelve percent of patients with ≥five visits received both depression and smoking-status screens on each of their first five visits. Screening patterns varied significantly across sites. For example, one site screened approximately 87% of patients for both depression and smoking-status at every visit. Another site screened 93% of patients for smoking during the first visit but did not conduct depression screening. Programs considering initiating new screenings should evaluate the clinic-specific workflow of successful screenings and integrate new screenings using the same strategy.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overDepressionFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMedicarePrimary Health CareRetrospective StudiesSmokingSmoking PreventionUnited States

Identifiers

PMID27442712
PMCPMC9721955

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.