Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34076567›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2021

Reflections on project ECHO: qualitative findings from five different ECHO programs.

Jon Agley, Janet Delong, Andrea Janota, Anyé Carson, Jeffrey Roberts, Gerardo Maupome

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Power of ECHO Autism: Improving Confidence and Holistic Care for Autistic Adults.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. AHRQ's digital healthcare research program: 20 years of advancing innovation and discovery.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jon AgleyPrevention Insights, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health Bloomington, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2345-8850
Janet DelongPrevention Insights, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health Bloomington, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.
Andrea JanotaIUPUI ECHO Center & Center for Public Health Practice, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University, Purdue University, Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indiana, USA.
Anyé CarsonIUPUI ECHO Center & Center for Public Health Practice, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University, Purdue University, Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indiana, USA.
Jeffrey RobertsPrevention Insights, Department of Applied Health Science, School of Public Health Bloomington, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.
Gerardo MaupomeRichard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indiana University, Purdue University, Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indiana, USA.
Indiana University Bloomington · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) was developed in 2003 as an innovative model to facilitate continuing education and professional development. ECHO emphasizes 'moving knowledge, not people.' To accomplish this, ECHO programs use virtual collaboration and case-based learning to allow practitioners, including those in rural and underserved areas, to receive specialist training. The ECHO model has expanded rapidly and is now used in 44 countries. Preliminary research on ECHO's efficacy and effectiveness has shown promising results, but evidence remains limited and appropriate research outcomes have not been clearly defined. To improve the evidence basis for ECHO, this study of 5 ECHO programs (cancer prevention/survivorship, integrated pain management, hepatitis C, HIV, and LGBTQ+ health care elucidated actionable insights about the ECHO programs and directions in which future evaluations and research might progress. This was a qualitative study following COREQ standards. A trained interviewer conducted 10 interviews and 5 focus groups with 25 unique, purposively sampled ECHO attendees (2 interviews and 1 focus group for each of the 5 programs). Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the general inductive approach, then reviewed for reliability. We identified four major categories (reasons to join ECHO, value of participating in ECHO, ways to improve ECHO, and barriers to participation) composed of 23 primary codes. We suggest that thematic saturation was achieved, and a coherent narrative about ECHO emerged for discussion. Participants frequently indicated they received valuable learning experiences and thereby changed their practice; rigorous trials of learning and patient-level outcomes are warranted. This study also found support for the idea that the ECHO model should be studied for its role in convening communities of practice and reducing provider isolation as an outcome in itself. Additional implications, including for interprofessional education and model evolution, were also identified and discussed.

Indexed as

Medically Underserved AreaCommunity Health ServicesEducation, MedicalHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchReproducibility of ResultsSpecializationcontinuing educationECHOmedical educationprofessional developmentProject ECHO

Identifiers

PMID34076567
PMCPMC8174483
OpenAlexW3165596451

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.