Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31074811›Full record

Observational studyJAMA network open2019

Association of Primary Care Clinic Appointment Time With Clinician Ordering and Patient Completion of Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening.

Esther Y Hsiang, Shivan J Mehta, Dylan S Small, Charles A L Rareshide, Christopher K Snider, Susan C Day, Mitesh S Patel

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Assessing Decision Fatigue in General Practitioners' Prescribing Decisions Using the Australian BEACH Data Set.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The challenge of cognitive science for medical diagnosis.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023
    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

7 authors.

Esther Y HsiangSchool of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Shivan J MehtaPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Dylan S SmallWharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Charles A L RareshidePenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Christopher K SniderPenn Medicine Nudge Unit, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Susan C DayPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Mitesh S PatelWharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Funding

Behavioral Economics and Population-based Colorectal Cancer ScreeningK08CA234326 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MEHTA, SHIVAN JATIN · 2018 to 2022
$1.3M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA234326
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: As the clinic day progresses, clinicians may fall behind schedule and experience decision fatigue. However, the association of time of day with cancer screening rates is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the association of primary care clinic appointment time with clinician ordering and patient completion of breast and colorectal cancer screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective, quality improvement study of 33 primary care practices in Pennsylvania and New Jersey from September 1, 2014, to August 31, 2016. Participants included adults eligible for breast or colorectal cancer screening. Data analysis was conducted from April 24, 2018, to November 8, 2018. Exposures: Clinic appointment time during each patient's first primary care physician visit in the study period. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was clinician ordering of the screening test during the visit. Secondary outcome was patient completion of the tests within 1 year of the visit. Results: Among the 19 254 patients eligible for breast cancer screening, the mean (SD) age was 60.2 (6.9) years; 19 254 (100%) were female, 11 682 (60.7%) were white, and 5495 (28.5%) were black. Screening test order rates were highest at 8 am at 63.7%, decreased throughout the morning to 48.7% at 11 am, increased to 56.2% at noon, and then decreased to 47.8% at 5 pm (adjusted odds ratio [OR] for overall trend, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.96; P < .001). Trends in screening test completion rates were similar beginning at 33.2% at 8 am and decreasing to 17.8% at 5 pm (adjusted OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97; P < .001). Among the 33 468 patients eligible for colorectal cancer screening, the mean (SD) age was 59.6 (7.4) years; 18 672 (55.8%) were female, 22 157 (66.2%) were white, and 7296 (21.8%) were black. Screening test order rates were 36.5% at 8 am, decreased to 31.3% by 11 am, increased at noon to 34.4%, and then decreased to 23.4% at 5 pm (adjusted OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.95; P < .001). Trends in screening test completion rates were similar beginning at 28.0% at 8 am and decreasing to 17.8% at 5 pm (adjusted OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.98; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Clinician ordering of cancer screening tests significantly decreased as the clinic day progressed. Patient completion of cancer screening tests within 1 year of the visit was also lower as the primary care appointment time was later in the day. Future interventions targeting improvements in cancer screening should consider how time of day may influence these behaviors.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesAgedColonoscopyFemaleHumansMaleMammographyMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareQuality ImprovementRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID31074811
PMCPMC6512279

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.