Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27599713›Full record

SynthesisPatient education and counseling2017

Motivational interviewing to improve health screening uptake: A systematic review.

Sarah J Miller, Kelly Foran-Tuller, Jessica Ledergerber, Lina Jandorf

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Patient education and counseling, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03595904 (Internet-Based Motivational Interviewing for Colonoscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

NCT03595904 nacompletednot on this map

Internet-Based Motivational Interviewing for Colonoscopy

TypeinterventionalSponsorIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiRan2017 to 2020Enrolled78ConditionsColorectal NeoplasmsArmsE-Motivate group, Usual Care Group
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah J MillerDepartment of Oncological Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: sarah.miller@mssm.edu.
Kelly Foran-TullerDepartment of Psychology, United States Department of Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA.
Jessica LedergerberWestern University of Health Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Panoma, CA, USA.
Lina JandorfDepartment of Oncological Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs · USWestern University of Health Sciences · US

Funding

Internet-based Motivational Interviewing for Colonoscopy in African AmericansK07CA190726 · NCI · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI MILLER, SARAH J · 2015 to 2019
$853k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA190726
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHealth screenings, physical tests that diagnose disease, are underutilized. Motivational interviewing (MI) may increase health screening rates. This paper systematically reviewed the published articles that examined the efficacy of MI for improving health screening uptake.

methodsArticles published before April 28, 2015 were reviewed from PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Study methodology, participant demographics, outcomes and quality were extracted from each article.

resultsOf the 1573 abstracts, 13 met inclusion criteria. Of the 13 studies, 6 found MI more efficacious than a control, 2 found MI more efficacious than a weak control yet equivalent to an active control, and 3 found MI was not significantly better than a control. Two single arm studies reported improvements in health screening rates following an MI intervention.

conclusionsMI shows promise for improving health screening uptake. However, given the mixed results, the variability amongst the studies and the limited number of randomized trials, it is difficult to discern the exact impact of MI on health screening uptake. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Future research is needed to better understand the impact of MI in this context. Such research would determine whether MI should be integrated into standard clinical practice for improving health screening uptake.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CareDirective CounselingHealth BehaviorHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMass ScreeningMotivational InterviewingHealth screeningsMotivational interviewingPrevention

Identifiers

PMID27599713
PMCPMC5318209
OpenAlexW2512836980

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.