Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28202429›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2017

Virtual Patient Technology: Engaging Primary Care in Quality Improvement Innovations.

Amanda C Blok, Christine N May, Rajani S Sadasivam, Thomas K Houston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Amanda C BlokQuantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5329-0393
Christine N MayQuantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4367-5310
Rajani S SadasivamQuantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8406-6207
Thomas K HoustonQuantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2909-4018

Funding

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS CENTER FOR CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCEUL1RR031982 · NCRR · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI SULLIVAN, JOHN LEWIS · 2010 to 2011
$6.8M
NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR031982
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEngaging health care staff in new quality improvement programs is challenging.

objectiveWe developed 2 virtual patient (VP) avatars in the context of a clinic-level quality improvement program. We sought to determine differences in preferences for VPs and the perceived influence of interacting with the VP on clinical staff engagement with the quality improvement program.

methodsUsing a participatory design approach, we developed an older male smoker VP and a younger female smoker VP. The older male smoker was described as a patient with cardiovascular disease and was ethnically ambiguous. The female patient was younger and was worried about the impact of smoking on her pregnancy. Clinical staff were allowed to choose the VP they preferred, and the more they engaged with the VP, the more likely the VP was to quit smoking and become healthier. We deployed the VP within the context of a quality improvement program designed to encourage clinical staff to refer their patients who smoke to a patient-centered Web-assisted tobacco intervention. To evaluate the VPs, we used quantitative analyses using multivariate models of provider and practice characteristics and VP characteristic preference and analyses of a brief survey of positive deviants (clinical staff in practices with high rates of encouraging patients to use the quit smoking innovation).

resultsA total of 146 clinical staff from 76 primary care practices interacted with the VPs. Clinic staff included medical providers (35/146, 24.0%), nurse professionals (19/146, 13.0%), primary care technicians (5/146, 3.4%), managerial staff (67/146, 45.9%), and receptionists (20/146, 13.7%). Medical staff were mostly male, and other roles were mostly female. Medical providers (OR 0.031; CI 0.003-0.281; P=.002) and younger staff (OR 0.411; CI 0.177-0.952; P=.038) were less likely to choose the younger, female VP when controlling for all other characteristics. VP preference did not influence online patient referrals by staff. In high-performing practices that referred 20 or more smokers to the ePortal (13/76), the majority of clinic staff were motivated by or liked the virtual patient (20/26, 77%).

conclusionsMedical providers are more likely motivated by VPs that are similar to their patient population, while nurses and other staff may prefer avatars that are more similar to them.

Indexed as

clinical staff engagementenvironment designhealth promotioninterdisciplinary health teamstobacco use cessationvirtual patients

Identifiers

PMID28202429
PMCPMC5332834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.