ArticlePloS one2022
Impact evaluation of a brief online training module on physician use of the Maryland, USA, Prescription Drug Monitoring Program.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prescription drug monitoring program perceptions before and after an interprofessional workshop: a theory-informed longitudinal survey study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs) are electronic databases that track controlled substance prescriptions in a state. They are underused tools in preventing opioid abuse. Most PDMP education research measures changes in knowledge or confidence rather than behavior.
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of online case-based training on healthcare provider use of the Maryland (USA) PDMP.
methodsWe used e-mail distribution lists to recruit providers to complete a brief educational module. Using a pre-training and post-training survey in the module, we measured self-reported PDMP use patterns and perceived PDMP value in specific clinical situations and compared pre- and post-training responses. Within the module, we presented three fictional pain cases and asked participants how they would manage each, both before, and then after presenting prescription drug history simulating a PDMP report. We measured changes in the fictional case treatment plans before and after seeing prescription history. Finally, we measured and compared how often each participant accessed the Maryland PDMP database before and after completing the educational module. We used multivariate logistic regression to measure the effect of the intervention on actual PDMP use frequency.
resultsOne hundred and fifty participants enrolled and completed the training module, and we successfully retrieved real-world PDMP use data of 137 of them. Participants' decisions to prescribe opioids changed significantly after reviewing PDMP data in each of the fictional cases provided in the module. In the months following the training, the rate of PDMP use increased by a median of four use-cases per month among providers in practice for less than 20 years (p = 0.039) and two use-cases per month among infrequent opioid prescribers (p = 0.014).
conclusionA brief online case-based educational intervention was associated with a significant increase in the rate of PDMP use among infrequent opioid prescribers and those in practice less than 20 years.
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.