Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646039›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2018

Effect of an Automated Patient Dashboard Using Active Choice and Peer Comparison Performance Feedback to Physicians on Statin Prescribing: The PRESCRIBE Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Mitesh S Patel, Gregory W Kurtzman, Sneha Kannan, Dylan S Small, Alexander Morris, Steve Honeywell, Damien Leri, Charles A L Rareshide, Susan C Day, Kevin B Mahoney and 2 more

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 58 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT03021759 nacompletednot on this map

Pragmatic, Randomized Evaluation of Statin Active Choice to Reach Improved Outcomes Based on Evidence

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PennsylvaniaRan2017 to 2017Enrolled4,774ConditionsCardiovascular DiseasesArmsActive choice, Social comparison feedback
NCT04660032 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Randomized Evaluation of Hypertensive Moms: Interventional Nudge to Drive Transitions of Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PennsylvaniaRan2021 to 2023Enrolled224ConditionsPreeclampsia, Preeclampsia Severe, Gestational Hypertension, Hypertensive Disorder of PregnancyArmsNudge
NCT05787249 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Improving Utilization of Supplemental Breast MRI Screening for Women With Extremely Dense Breasts

TypeinterventionalSponsorAbramson Cancer Center at Penn MedicineRan2023 to 2025Enrolled1,358ConditionsBreast CancerArmsPatient nudge, Provider nudge
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mitesh S PatelPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Gregory W KurtzmanPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Sneha KannanDepartment of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Dylan S SmallThe Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Alexander MorrisPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Steve HoneywellPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Damien LeriPenn Medicine Center for Health Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Charles A L RareshidePenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Susan C DayPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Kevin B MahoneyPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Kevin G VolppPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
David A AschPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
University of Pennsylvania · USUniversity of Pennsylvania Health System · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USPhiladelphia VA Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Statins are not prescribed to approximately 50% of patients who could benefit from them. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an automated patient dashboard using active choice framing with and without peer comparison feedback on performance to nudge primary care physicians (PCPs) to increase guideline-concordant statin prescribing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 3-arm cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 21, 2017, to April 21, 2017, at 32 practice sites in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Participants included 96 PCPs and 4774 patients not previously receiving statin therapy. Data were analyzed from April 25, 2017, to June 16, 2017. Interventions: Primary care physicians in the 2 intervention arms were emailed a link to an automated online dashboard listing their patients who met national guidelines for statin therapy but had not been prescribed this medication. The dashboard included relevant patient information, and for each patient, PCPs were asked to make an active choice to prescribe atorvastatin, 20 mg, once daily, atorvastatin at another dose, or another statin or not prescribe a statin and select a reason. The dashboard was available for 2 months. In 1 intervention arm, the email to PCPs also included feedback on their statin prescribing rate compared with their peers. Primary care physicians in the usual care group received no interventions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Statin prescription rates. Results: Patients had a mean (SD) age of 62.4 (8.3) years and a mean (SD) 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score of 13.6 (8.2); 2625 (55.0%) were male, 3040 (63.7%) were white, and 1318 (27.6%) were black. In the active choice arm, 16 of 32 PCPs (50.0%) accessed the patient dashboard, but only 2 of 32 (6.3%) signed statin prescription orders. In the active choice with peer comparison arm, 12 of 32 PCPs (37.5%) accessed the patient dashboard and 8 of 32 (25.0%) signed statin prescription orders. Statins were prescribed in 40 of 1566 patients (2.6%) in the usual care arm, 116 of 1743 (6.7%) in the active choice arm, and 117 of 1465 (8.0%) in the active choice with peer comparison arm. In the main adjusted model, compared with usual care, there was a significant increase in statin prescribing in the active choice with peer comparison arm (adjusted difference in percentage points, 5.8; 95% CI, 0.9-13.5; P = .008), but not in the active choice arm (adjusted difference in percentage points, 4.1; 95% CI, -0.8 to 13.1; P = .11). Conclusions and Relevance: An automated patient dashboard using both active choice framing and peer comparison feedback led to a modest but significant increase in guideline-concordant statin prescribing rates. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03021759.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Physicians'AutomationDrug PrescriptionsFeedbackFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMaleMiddle AgedPeer GroupPrimary Health CareHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID30646039
PMCPMC6324300
OpenAlexW2884404890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.