ArticlePediatrics2024
Accelerating Innovation in Primary Care to Support Adolescent Health Discussions.
Article in Pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing Quality of Life and Symptoms in Transplantation and CAR-T Recipients: Expert Panel Recommendations from the Survivorship Special Interest Group of ASTCT.Transplantation and cellular therapy · 2025Review
- Implementing an Electronic Health Record-Integrated Pediatric Primary Care Sleep Screener.JAMA network open · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesAdolescent strengths and risks are not routinely captured in systematized and actionable ways in pediatric primary care. To address this problem, we developed a comprehensive adolescent health questionnaire (AHQ) integrated within the electronic health record and evaluated the AHQ's impact on collection of information on prioritized health-related domains.
methodsWe developed and pilot tested the AHQ. We then scaled and assessed the AHQ's impact on data collection. AHQ development used innovation methods and measured feasibility and acceptability outcomes. Scaling and postscaling outcomes included Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance and Sustainability measures: Reach (total questionnaires completed), Effectiveness (capture of key information across health domains pre- vs post-AHQ scaling), Adoption (proportion of practices that adopted the AHQ), Implementation (proportion of eligible adolescents who completed the AHQ), and Maintenance (monthly completion rates).
resultsAHQ development led to a tool that was feasible and acceptable for use. During scaling (October 2020-December 2021), 22 147 questionnaires were completed by 20 749 unique adolescents aged 13 to 21 years at their preventive visit. Comparing pre- versus post-AHQ scaling data, use of the AHQ increased collection of information across domains, especially for strengths, gun safety, substance use, sexual activity, sexual orientation, and gender identity, from ranges of 0%-25% to 92%-95%. All 31 practices adopted the AHQ with completion at 88.7% of visits (n = 24 968). Two years postscaling, completion rates were >91% per month.
conclusionsWe successfully developed, scaled, and maintained an AHQ in a widely-used electronic health record system, a model for improving adolescent care and foundation for developing future interventions.
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.