Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33284174›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of continuing education in the health professions2020

Development of an Instrument to Assess the Perceived Effectiveness of Academic Detailing.

Mary H Smart, Andrea L Monteiro, Christopher D Saffore, Aleksandrina Ruseva, Todd A Lee, Michael A Fischer, Alan Simon Pickard

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of continuing education in the health professions, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mary H SmartDr. Smart, Ms. Monteiro, Dr. Saffore, Ms. Ruseva, Dr. Lee, Dr. Pickard: Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL; and Dr. Fischer: Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, National Resource Center for Academic Detailing, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Andrea L Monteiro
Christopher D Saffore
Aleksandrina Ruseva
Todd A Lee
Michael A Fischer
Alan Simon Pickard
University of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

Impacting the Prescribing of Opioids through Academic DetailingR01CE003156 · CE · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI PICKARD, ALAN SIMON · 2019 to 2021
$2.3M
ACL HHS R01CE003156NCIPC CDC HHS R01 CE003156
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAcademic detailing (AD) is an effective, evidence-based education outreach method of promoting clinician behavior change. Detailer feedback is important for program evaluation but is rarely systematically collected. The study's objective was to develop a measure capturing the detailer's perception of the effectiveness of an AD program.

methodsA six-item measure with a five-level scale was initially developed from the literature review and expert panel consultation. Item constructs were usefulness, acceptability, feasibility, relevance, effectiveness of communication, and readiness to change. The measure was piloted, refined, and tested during an opioid-focused AD program that included two visits. The instrument structure was evaluated using exploratory factor analysis, measure reliability was assessed using item-item correlation (rho), corrected item-total correlation, Cronbach alpha (α), and item response theory.

resultsThe initial six-item instrument demonstrated unidimensionality. The Cronbach α for the measure was 0.74 (visit 1) and 0.79 (visit 2); one item (relevance) was redundant (α = 0.73 and 0.79 when deleted) and therefore dropped. Items related to usefulness, acceptability, and readiness to change displayed high item-item correlation (rho ≥ 0.50) and contributed the most information and seemed to operate as a single scale (ie, "likelihood to change") based on item response theory analysis. Items related to feasibility and communication were slightly different constructs and should be reported separately. DISCUSSION: The five-item detailer assessment of visit effectiveness (the "DAVE") instrument provides a standardized approach to assess AD. Further study of its validity and broader use in other programs and educational outreach activities is encouraged.

Indexed as

PerceptionAdultBehavior TherapyEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33284174
PMCPMC8051138
OpenAlexW3083120789

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.