Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32589056›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2020

Practical challenges in the conduct of pragmatic trials embedded in health plans: Lessons of IMPACT-AFib, an FDA-Catalyst trial.

Crystal J Garcia, Kevin Haynes, Sean D Pokorney, Nancy D Lin, Cheryl McMahill-Walraven, Vinit Nair, Lauren Parlett, David Martin, Hussein R Al-Khalidi, Debbe McCall and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Mobile Health Study Incorporating Novel Fitness Test.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2023
    Article
  7. The US Food and Drug Administration Sentinel System: a national resource for a learning health system.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022
    Article
  8. When Can We Trust Real-World Data To Evaluate New Medical Treatments?Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2022
    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

13 authors.

Crystal J GarciaDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9220-6078
Kevin HaynesHealthCore, Inc., Wilmington, DE, USA.
Sean D PokorneyDivision of Cardiology and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Nancy D LinOptumInsight Life Sciences, Inc., Boston, MA, USA.
Cheryl McMahill-WalravenAetna Inc., a CVS Health Company, Blue Bell, PA, USA.
Vinit NairHumana Healthcare Research, Humana Inc., Louisville, KY, USA.
Lauren ParlettHealthCore, Inc., Wilmington, DE, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1240-4566
David MartinU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Hussein R Al-KhalidiDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Debbe McCallRowan Tree Perspectives Consulting, Murrieta, CA, USA.
Christopher B GrangerDivision of Cardiology and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Richard PlattDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Noelle M CocorosDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

FDA HHS HHSF223201400030IFDA HHS U18 FD005292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

IMPACT-AFib was an 80,000-patient randomized clinical trial implemented by five US insurance companies (health plans) aimed at increasing the use of oral anticoagulants by individuals with atrial fibrillation who were at high risk of stroke and not on treatment. The underlying thesis was that patients could be change agents to initiate prescribing discussions with their providers. We tested the effect of mailing information to both patients and their providers. We used administrative medical claims and pharmacy dispensing data to identify eligible patients, to randomize them to an early or delayed intervention, and to assess clinical outcomes. The core data were analysis-ready datasets each site had created and curated for the FDA's Sentinel System, supplemented by updated "fresh" pharmacy and enrollment data to ensure eligibility at the time of intervention. Following mutually agreed upon procedures, sites linked to additional internal source data to implement the intervention-educational information mailed to patients and their providers in the early intervention arm, and to providers of patients in the delayed intervention arm approximately 12 months later. The primary analysis compares the early intervention arm to the delayed intervention arm, prior to the delayed intervention being conducted (i.e. compares intervention to non-intervention). The endpoints of interest were evidence of initiation of anticoagulation (primary) as well as clinical endpoints, including stroke and hospitalization for bleeding. Major challenges, some unanticipated, identified during the planning phase include convening multi-stakeholder investigator teams and advisors, addressing ethical concerns about not intervening in a usual care comparison group, and identifying and avoiding interference with sites' routine programs that were similar to the intervention. Needs and challenges during the

Indexed as

Insurance, HealthAnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationHemorrhageHospitalizationHumansPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignStrokeUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAnticoagulantsatrial fibrillationPragmatic clinical trialreal-world datareal-world evidenceSentinel Initiativestroke

Identifiers

PMID32589056
PMCPMC8293906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.