Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34535845›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Applying User-Centered Design to Develop Practical Strategies that Address Overuse in Primary Care.

Tanner J Caverly, Sarah E Skurla, Mandi L Klamerus, Jordan B Sparks, Eve A Kerr, Timothy P Hofer, David Reed, Laura J Damschroder

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tanner J CaverlyDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. tcaverly@med.umich.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6560-0547
Sarah E SkurlaDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Mandi L KlamerusDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jordan B SparksDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Eve A KerrDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Timothy P HoferDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
David ReedVeterans Affairs Ann Arbor Health Care System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Laura J DamschroderDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
VA Center for Clinical Management Research · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

Implementing Shared Decision-Making for Cancer Screening in Primary CareIK2HX002246 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI CAVERLY, TANNER J · 2018 to 2022
–
HSRD VA IK2 HX002246U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs IIR 15-131
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEngaging patients and frontline clinicians in re-designing clinical care is essential for improving care delivery in a complex clinical environment. This study sought to assess an innovative user-centered design approach to improving clinical care quality, focusing on the use cases of de-intensifying non-beneficial care within the following areas: (1) de-intensifying diabetes treatment in high-risk patients; (2) stopping screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and (3) stopping colorectal cancer screening in average-risk, older adults.

methodsThe user-centered design approach, consisting of patient and patient-clinician charrettes (defined as intensive workshops where key stakeholders collaborate to develop creative solutions to a specific problem) and participant surveys, has been described previously. Following the charrettes, we used inductive coding to identify and categorize themes emerging from the de-intensification ideas prioritized by participants as well as facilitator notes and audio recordings from the charrettes.

resultsThirty-five patients participated in the patient design charrettes, generating 134 unique de-intensification ideas and prioritizing 32, which were then distilled into six patient-generated principles of de-intensification by the study team. These principles provided a starting point for a subsequent patient-clinician charrette. In this follow-up charrette, 9 patients who had participated in an earlier patient design charrette collaborated with 7 clinicians to generate 63 potential de-intensification solutions. Six of these potential solutions were developed into multi-faceted, fully operationalized de-intensification strategies. DISCUSSION: The de-intensification strategies that patients and clinicians prioritized and operationalized during the co-design charrette process were detailed and multi-faceted. Each component of a strategy had a rationale based on feasibility, practical considerations, and ways of overcoming barriers. The charrette-based process may be a useful way to engage clinicians and patients in developing the complex and multi-faceted strategies needed to improve care delivery.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerUser-Centered DesignAgedHumansPrimary Health Carede-intensificationoveruseuser-centered designVeterans

Identifiers

PMID34535845
PMCPMC8993977
OpenAlexW3199914666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.