ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019
High-performing physicians are more likely to participate in a research study: findings from a quality improvement study.
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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Financial Incentives on Quality Measures in the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus: a Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Trial
- Baseline characteristics and comparability of older multimorbid patients with polypharmacy and general practitioners participating in a randomized controlled primary care trial.BMC family practice · 2021Trial
- Quality performance and associated factors in Swiss diabetes care - A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2020Trial
- Investigating assessment standards and fixed passing marks in dental undergraduate finals: a mixed-methods approach.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Improving collaboration between specialists and general practitioners in services for individuals with chronic spinal cord injury living in rural areas of Switzerland: Baseline results from the SCI-Co study.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2024Article
- [Attitudes of general practitioners and medical practice assistants towards the delegation of medical services: Results of a survey in Berlin, Brandenburg and Thuringia].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023Article
- Determinants of referral for suspected coronary artery disease: a qualitative study based on decision thresholds.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- The Swiss chiropractic practice-based research network: a population-based cross-sectional study to inform future musculoskeletal research.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- How do respondents of primary care surveys compare to typical users of primary care? A comparison of two surveys.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- Access to General Practitioners during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal: a nationwide survey of doctors.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- 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 · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What 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.