ArticleJournal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP2021
A cluster randomized trial to evaluate a centralized remote clinical pharmacy service in large, health system primary care clinics.
Article in Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02215408 (MEDication Focused Outpatient Care for Underutilization of Secondary Prevention), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
MEDication Focused Outpatient Care for Underutilization of Secondary Prevention
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of digital health interventions for telemedicine/telehealth for managing blood pressure in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical and economic outcomes of multidisciplinary team members in primary care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: We developed a remote cardiovascular risk service (CVRS) managed by clinical pharmacists to support primary care teams. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the CVRS could improve guideline adherence in primary care clinics with diverse geographic and patient characteristics. Methods: This study was a cluster-randomized trial initiated in 20 primary care clinics across the US. Clinics were stratified as high or low minority and then randomized to receive the intervention or maintain usual care for 12 months. The primary outcome was adherence to relevant The Guideline Advantage (TGA) criteria met. TGA is a compilation of criteria from practice guidelines intended to improve the quality of primary care. Post-hoc outcomes included changes in individual TGA measures. Results: A total of 401 study subjects were included in the analysis. Mean TGA scores remained the same in the intervention group (n=193, 0.72) and slightly decreased in the usual care group (n=208, 0.67 to 0.66) over the 12-month study period. There was no significant difference between the mean TGA scores in intervention and usual care groups for the overall population at 12 months (0.72 versus 0.66 respectively, p=0.10). For under-represented minority subjects, there was no significant difference between TGA scores at 12 months (n=186; 0.70 versus 0.67, respectively, p=0.50). In a post-hoc analysis of subjects uncontrolled at baseline, there was a significant improvement in systolic BP at 12 months in the intervention group versus usual care (model-based difference of -8.03mmHg, p=0.03). Conclusions: Improvements in individual TGA measures were limited, in part, due to higher than expected baseline TGA scores. Future studies of this model should focus on patients with uncontrolled conditions at high risk for cardiovascular events. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02215408; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02215408?id=NCT02215408.
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.