Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29316919›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Use of an electronic medical record reminder improves HIV screening.

Colleen Kershaw, Jessica L Taylor, Gary Horowitz, Diane Brockmeyer, Howard Libman, Gila Kriegel, Long Ngo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Making Sense of the Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Clinical Practice Guidelines: What Clinicians Need to Know.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Exploring Primary Care Clinicians' Sexual and Reproductive Health Care Delivery to Male Adolescents and Young Adults.Journal of pediatric health care : official publication of National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners
    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

7 authors.

Colleen KershawDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 110 Francis Street, Suite GB, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. Ckersha1@bidmc.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8989-6146
Jessica L TaylorDepartment of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, 801 Massachusetts Avenue, Crosstown 2, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
Gary HorowitzDepartment of Pathology, Tufts Medical Center, Biewend Building 3, 800 Washington St, Boston, MA, 02111, USA.
Diane BrockmeyerDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Howard LibmanDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Gila KriegelDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Long NgoDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore than 1 in 7 patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in the United States are unaware of their serostatus despite recommendations of US agencies that all adults through age 65 be screened for HIV at least once. To facilitate universal screening, an electronic medical record (EMR) reminder was created for our primary care practice. Screening rates before and after implementation were assessed to determine the impact of the reminder on screening rates.

methodsA retrospective cohort analysis was performed for patients age 18-65 with visits between January 1, 2012-October 30, 2014. EMR databases were examined for HIV testing and selected patient characteristics. We evaluated the probability of HIV screening in unscreened patients before and after the reminder and used a multivariable generalized linear model to test the association between likelihood of HIV testing and specific patient characteristics.

resultsPrior to the reminder, the probability of receiving an HIV test for previously unscreened patients was 15.3%. This increased to 30.7% after the reminder (RR 2.02, CI 1.95-2.09, p < 0.0001). The impact was most significant in patients age 45-65. White race, English as primary language, and higher median household income were associated with lower likelihoods of screening both before and after implementation (RR 0.68, CI 0.65-0.72; RR 0.74, CI 0.67-0.82; RR 0.84, CI 0.80-0.88, respectively).

conclusionsThe EMR reminder increased rates of HIV screening twofold in our practice. It was most effective in increasing screening rates in older patients. Patients who were white, English-speaking, and had higher incomes were less likely to be screened for HIV both before and after the reminder.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningPrimary Health CareReminder SystemsAdultAppointments and SchedulesElectronic Health RecordsEthnicityFemaleHealth Services ResearchHIV InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesUnited StatesYoung AdultDecision supportElectronic medical record reminderHIVScreening

Identifiers

PMID29316919
PMCPMC5761195

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.