ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
A Case for Using Electronic Health Record Data in the Evaluation of Produce Prescription Programs.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05939349 (A Prescription for Health Equity), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Prescription for Health Equity: A Healthcare Provider-based Produce Prescription Program for People With Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Food is Medicine Initiative for Mitigating Food Insecurity in the United States.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2024Review
- Advancing Food Is Medicine Research: An EPIS-Informed Qualitative Study of Stakeholder Views.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Produce prescription programs within clinical care settings can address food insecurity by offering financial incentives through "prescriptions" for fruits and vegetables to eligible patients. The electronic health record (EHR) holds potential as a strategy to examine the relationship between these projects and participant outcomes, but no studies address EHR extraction for programmatic evaluations. We interviewed representatives of 9 grantees of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Grant Program's Produce Prescription Projects (GusNIP PPR) to understand their experiences with and capacity for utilizing EHR for evaluation. Five grantees planned to use EHR data, with 3 main strategies: reporting aggregate data from health clinics, contracting with external/third party evaluators, and accessing individual-level data. However, utilizing EHRs was prohibitive for others due to insufficient knowledge, training and/or staff capacity; lack of familiarity with the Institutional Review Board process; or was inappropriate for select target populations. Policy support for produce prescription programs requires a robust evidence base, deep knowledge of best practices, and an understanding of expected health outcomes. These insights can be most efficiently and meaningfully achieved with EHR data, which will require increased financial support and technical assistance for project operators.
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.