ArticleJMIR formative research2021
Reach Outcomes and Costs of Different Physician Referral Strategies for a Weight Management Program Among Rural Primary Care Patients: Type 3 Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Trial.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03690557 (Examining Reach and Implementation of an Evidence-based Weight Loss Program in Rural Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Examining Reach and Implementation of an Evidence-based Weight Loss Program in Rural Primary Care
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Identifying recruitment strategies to improve the reach of evidence-based health promotion, disease prevention, and disease self-management interventions: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Pragmatic online obesity treatment in primary care: a hybrid randomized clinical trial of implementation strategies.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2024Article
- Implementing evidence-based practices in rural settings: a scoping review of theories, models, and frameworks.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Article
- Design and management considerations for control groups in hybrid effectiveness-implementation trials: Narrative review & case studies.Frontiers in health services · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRural residents are at high risk for obesity; however, little resources exist to address this disproportional burden of disease. Primary care may provide an opportunity to connect primary care patients with overweight and obesity to effective weight management programming.
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to examine the utility of different physician referral and engagement processes for improving the reach of an evidence-based and technology-delivered weight management program with counseling support for rural primary care patients.
methodsA total of 5 rural primary care physicians were randomly assigned a sequence of four referral strategies: point-of-care (POC) referral with active telephone follow-up (ATF); POC referral, no ATF; a population health registry-derived letter referral with ATF; and letter referral, no ATF. For registry-derived referrals, physicians screened a list of patients with BMI ≥25 and approved patients for participation to receive a personalized referral letter via mail.
resultsOut of a potential 991 referrals, 573 (57.8%) referrals were made over 16 weeks, and 98 (9.9%) patients were enrolled in the program (58/98, 59.2% female). Differences based on letter (485/991, 48.9%) versus POC (506/991, 51.1%) referrals were identified for completion (100% vs 7%; P<.001) and for proportion screened (36% vs 12%; P<.001) but not for proportion enrolled (12% vs 8%; P=.10). Patients receiving ATF were more likely to be screened (47% vs 7%; P<.001) and enrolled (15% vs 7%; P<.001) than those not receiving ATF. On the basis of the number of referrals made in each condition, we found variations in the proportion and number of enrollees (POC with ATF: 27/190, 50%; POC no ATF: 14/316, 41%; letter ATF: 30/199; 15.1%; letter no ATF: 27/286, 9.4%). Across all conditions, participants were representative of the racial and ethnic characteristics of the region (60% female, P=.15; 94% White individuals, P=.60; 94% non-Hispanic, P=.19). Recruitment costs totaled US $6192, and the overall recruitment cost per enrolled participant was US $63. Cost per enrolled participant ranged from POC with ATF (US $47), registry-derived letter without ATF (US $52), and POC without ATF (US $56) to registry-derived letter with ATF (US $91).
conclusionsLetter referral with ATF appears to be the best option for enrolling a large number of patients in a digitally delivered weight management program; however, POC with ATF and letters without ATF yielded similar numbers at a lower cost. The best referral option is likely dependent on the best fit with clinical resources.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03690557; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03690557.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.