ArticleJournal of studies on alcohol and drugs2018
Assessing Brief Intervention for Unhealthy Alcohol Use: A Comparison of Electronic Health Record Documentation and Patient Self-Report.
Article in Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diabetes Life Expectancy Prediction Model Inputs and Results From Patient Surveys Compared With Electronic Health Record Abstraction: Survey Study.JMIR aging · 2023Article
- Racial/ethnic and gender differences in receipt of brief intervention among patients with unhealthy alcohol use in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration.Journal of substance abuse treatment · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAlcohol screening and brief intervention (BI) are recommended preventive health practices. Veterans Health Administration (VA) uses a performance measure to incentivize BI delivery. Concerns have been raised about the validity of the BI performance measure, which relies on electronic health record (EHR) documentation. Our objective was to assess concordance between EHR-based documentation and patient-reported receipt of BI, and to examine correlates of concordance.
methodPatients with a documented positive screen for unhealthy alcohol use at VA Greater Los Angeles primary care clinics were surveyed (within 15 days on average) in 2013-2014. Documented BI was indicated by an EHR note that the patient was advised to drink within recommended limits or reduce or abstain from drinking. Patient-reported receipt of BI corresponded to an affirmative response to questions on whether a VA provider advised the patient to drink less or abstain. Patient report and documentation were assessed over the same period.
resultsDocumented and patient-reported receipt of BI had low concordance. Almost all patients who reported receiving BI had documentation of BI (93%; 95% CI [90%, 95%]), but only 63% [59%, 67%] of patients with documented BI reported receiving it. BI concordance was associated with more severe unhealthy alcohol use and drinking-related consequences, mental health comorbidity, and greater readiness-to-change alcohol use.
conclusionsDiscrepancies between EHR documentation and patient-reported BI raise concerns about performance measure validity. Patient-reported receipt of BI could be an alternative or complementary measure of BI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30422782PMC6240012W2900750236What 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.