Trial reportBMJ open quality2024
Health information technology tools to accelerate gastrointestinal evaluation in patients with iron deficiency anaemia: a cluster randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 1 paper, 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.
EHR-based Patient Identification and Panel Management of Patients With Iron Deficiency Anemia, a Pragmatic Primary Care Physician Randomized Trial of a Quality Improvement Method
Effects of Manually Recorded or Automatically Transmitted Home Blood Pressures With or Without Automated Patient Feedback on Hypertension Care
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital patient safety interventions in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSystem-level safety measures do not exist to ensure that patients with iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) undergo proper diagnostic evaluations. We sought to determine if a set of EHR (electronic health record) tools and an expedited referral workflow increase short-term completion of bidirectional endoscopy in higher risk patients with IDA. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomised trial randomised by primary care physician (PCP) that included 16 PCPs and 316 patients with IDA. Physicians were randomised to intervention or control groups. Intervention components included a patient registry visible within the EHR, point-of-care alert and expedited diagnostic evaluation workflow for IDA. Outcomes were assessed at 120 days. The primary outcome was completion of bidirectional endoscopy. Secondary outcomes were any endoscopy completed or scheduled, gastroenterology consultation completed, and gastroenterology referral or endoscopy ordered or completed.
resultsThere were no differences in the primary or secondary outcomes. At 120 days, the primary outcome had occurred for 7 (4%) of the intervention group and 5 (3.5%) of the control group. For the three secondary outcomes, rates were 15 (8.6%), 12 (6.9%) and 39 (22.4%) for the immediate intervention group and 10 (7.0%), 9 (6.3%) and 25 (17.6%) for the control group, respectively, p>0.2. Lack of physician time to use the registry tools was identified as a barrier. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionProviding PCPs with lists of patients with IDA and a pathway for expedited evaluation did not increase rates of completing endoscopic evaluation in the short term. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05365308.
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.