Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31033446›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2019

Applicability of Motivational Interviewing for Chronic Disease Management in Primary Care Following a Web-Based E-Learning Course: Cross-Sectional Study.

Karoline Lukaschek, Nico Schneider, Mercedes Schelle, Ulrik Bak Kirk, Tina Eriksson, Ilkka Kunnamo, Andrée Rochfort, Claire Collins, Jochen Gensichen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Karoline Lukaschek *Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7966-2001
Nico Schneider *Institute of Psychosocial Medicine and Psychotherapy, Jena University Hospital, University of Jena, Jena, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7612-550X
Mercedes SchelleInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Jena University Hospital, University of Jena, Jena, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5536-0105
Ulrik Bak KirkEuropean Society for Quality and Safety in Family Practice, København, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1683-2189
Tina ErikssonEuropean Society for Quality and Safety in Family Practice, København, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0617-5771
Ilkka KunnamoThe Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4817-6991
Andrée RochfortIrish College of General Practitioners, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3904-031X
Claire CollinsIrish College of General Practitioners, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8967-5159
Jochen GensichenInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0644-8597
Jena University Hospital · DEQuality of Life Research Center · DKFinnish Medical Society Duodecim · FILudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMotivational interviewing (MI) is an established communication method for enhancing intrinsic motivation for changing health behavior. E-learning can reduce the cost and time involved in providing continuing education and can be easily integrated into individual working arrangements and the daily routines of medical professionals. Thus, a Web-based course was devised to familiarize health professionals with different levels of education and expertise with MI techniques for patients with chronic conditions.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to report participants' opinion on the practicality of MI (as learned in the course) in daily practice, stratified by the level of education.

methodsParticipants (N=607) of the MI Web-based training course evaluated the course over 18 months, using a self-administered questionnaire. The evaluation was analyzed descriptively and stratified for the level of education (medical students, physicians in specialist training [PSTs], and general practitioners [GPs]).

resultsParticipants rated the applicability of the skills and knowledge gained by the course as positive (medical students: 94% [79/84] good; PSTs: 88.6% [109/123] excellent; and GPs: 51.3% [182/355] excellent). When asked whether they envisage the use of MI in the future, 79% (67/84) of the students stated to a certain extent, 88.6% (109/123) of the PSTs stated to a great extent, and 38.6% (137/355) of GPs stated to a great extent. Participants acknowledged an improvement of communication skills such as inviting (medical students: 85% [72/84]; PSTs: 90.2% [111/123]; GPs: 37.2% [132/355]) and encouraging (medical students: 81% [68/84]; PSTs: 45.5% [56/123]; GPs: 36.3% [129/355]) patients to talk about behavior change and conveying respect for patient's choices (medical students: 72% [61/84]; PSTs: 50.0% [61/123]; GPs: 23.4% [83/355]).

conclusionsParticipants confirmed the practicality of MI. However, the extent to which the practicality of MI was acknowledged as well as its expected benefits depended on the individual's level of education/expertise.

Indexed as

disease managemente-learninghealth behavior changemotivational interviewingprimary careweb-based learning

Identifiers

PMID31033446
PMCPMC6658265
OpenAlexW2943715574

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.