Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31387540›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019

High-performing physicians are more likely to participate in a research study: findings from a quality improvement study.

Simone Dahrouge, Catherine Deri Armstrong, William Hogg, Jatinderpreet Singh, Clare Liddy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A skills network approach to physicians' competence in shared decision making.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Observational
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

5 authors.

Simone DahrougeCT Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, 113-43, rue Bruyère St, K1N 5C7, Annex E, Ottawa, ON, Canada. sdahrouge@bruyere.org.ORCID 0000-0001-6488-8086
Catherine Deri ArmstrongDepartment of Economics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
William HoggCT Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, 113-43, rue Bruyère St, K1N 5C7, Annex E, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Jatinderpreet SinghCT Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, 113-43, rue Bruyère St, K1N 5C7, Annex E, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Clare LiddyCT Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, 113-43, rue Bruyère St, K1N 5C7, Annex E, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParticipants in voluntary research present a different demographic profile than those who choose not to participate, affecting the generalizability of many studies. Efforts to evaluate these differences have faced challenges, as little information is available from non-participants. Leveraging data from a recent randomized controlled trial that used health administrative databases in a jurisdiction with universal medical coverage, we sought to compare the quality of care provided by participating and non-participating physicians prior to the program's implementation in order to assess whether participating physicians provided a higher baseline quality of care.

methodsWe conducted clustered regression analyses of baseline data from provincial health administrative databases. Participants included all family physicians who were eligible to participate in the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) project, a quality improvement project rolled out in a geographically defined region in Ontario (Canada) between 2008 and 2011. We assessed 14 performance indicators representing measures of access, continuity, and recommended care for cancer screening and chronic disease management.

resultsIn unadjusted and patient-adjusted models, patients of IDOCC-participating physicians had higher continuity scores at the provider (Odds Ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval]: 1.06 [1.03-1.09]) and practice (1.06 [1.04-1.08]) level, lower risk of emergency room visits (Rate Ratio (RR): 0.93 [0.88-0.97]) and hospitalizations (RR:0.87 [0.77-0.99]), and were more likely to have received recommended diabetes tests (OR: 1.25 [1.06-1.49]) and cancer screening for cervical cancer (OR: 1.32 [1.08-1.61] and breast cancer (OR: 1.32 [1.19-1.46]) than patients of non-participating physicians. Some indicators remained statistically significant in the model after adjusting for provider factors.

conclusionsOur study demonstrated a participation bias for several quality indicators. Physician characteristics can explain some of these differences. Other underlying physician or practice attributes also influence interest in participating in quality improvement initiatives and existing quality levels. The standard for addressing participation bias by controlling for basic physician and practice level variables is inadequate for ensuring that results are generalizable to primary care providers and practices.

Indexed as

Physicians, FamilyQuality of Health CareCardiovascular DiseasesDatabases, FactualDelivery of Health CareHumansOntarioPractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality ImprovementQuality Indicators, Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegression AnalysisUniversal Health InsurancePrimary careQuality improvementResearch methodsVolunteer Bias

Identifiers

PMID31387540
PMCPMC6685269

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.