Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31730186›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Association of an Active Choice Intervention in the Electronic Health Record Directed to Medical Assistants With Clinician Ordering and Patient Completion of Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests.

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

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04660032 (Randomized Evaluation of Hypertensive Moms), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

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
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Prescribing patterns of SGLT-2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure: A two-center analysis.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Defining the Role of the Modern Oncology Provider in Mitigating Financial Toxicity.Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Esther Y HsiangDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
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 PatelPerelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
University of Pennsylvania · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USVeterans Health Administration · US

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: Early cancer detection can lead to improved outcomes, but cancer screening tests are often underused. Objective: To evaluate the association of an active choice intervention in the electronic health record directed to medical assistants with changes in clinician ordering and patient completion of breast and colorectal cancer screening tests. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective quality improvement study was conducted among 69 916 patients eligible for breast or colorectal cancer screening at 25 primary care practices at the University of Pennsylvania Health System between September 1, 2014, and August 31, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from January 21 to July 8, 2019. Interventions: From 2016 to 2017, 3 primary care practices at the University of Pennsylvania Health System implemented an active choice intervention in the electronic health record that prompted medical assistants to inform patients about cancer screening during check-in and template orders for clinicians to review during the visit. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was clinician ordering of cancer screening tests. The secondary outcome was patient completion of cancer screening tests within 1 year of the primary care visit. Results: The sample eligible for breast cancer screening comprised 26 269 women with a mean (SD) age of 60.4 (6.9) years; 15 873 (60.4%) were white and 7715 (29.4%) were black. The sample eligible for colorectal cancer screening comprised 43 647 patients with a mean (SD) age of 59.4 (7.5) years; 24 416 (55.9%) were women, 19 231 (44.1%) were men, 29 029 (66.5%) were white, and 9589 (22.0%) were black. For breast cancer screening, the intervention was associated with a significant increase in clinician ordering of tests (22.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 17.2-27.6 percentage points; P < .001) but no change in patient completion (0.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.0 to 4.3 percentage points; P = .45). For colorectal cancer screening, the intervention was associated with a significant increase in clinician ordering of tests (13.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 8.0-18.9 percentage points; P < .001) but no change in patient completion (1.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.2 to 4.6 percentage points; P = .36). Conclusions and Relevance: An active choice intervention in the electronic health record directed to medical assistants was associated with a significant increase in clinician ordering of breast and colorectal cancer screening tests. However, it was not associated with a significant change in patient completion of either cancer screening test during a 1-year follow-up.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsQuality ImprovementAgedBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsDiagnostic Techniques and ProceduresEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProcedures and Techniques UtilizationRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID31730186
PMCPMC6902810
OpenAlexW2983364452

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.