Trial reportBMJ open2024
Development and application of a qualitative rapid analysis framework in a hybrid trial within primary care.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It reports registered trial NCT04807400. Cited by 9 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.
A Phase IIIb, Multicentre, Randomised Controlled Study to Evaluate the Implementation, Preference and Utility for Administration of Inclisiran Sodium in Participants With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) or ASCVD-risk Equivalents and Elevated Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Using a Primary Care Models in the NHS.
Open the trial in the graphWho cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the implementation of inclisiran in primary care: process evaluation interim findings from interviews with key stakeholders.BMJ open · 2025Trial
- Rapid Pre-Implementation Evaluation for Multi-Specialty Surgical Trials: Informing Context-Specific Adaptations.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Development of S-IMCICA_V.2: A User-Centered Educational and Decision-Support mHealth App for Early Detection of Childhood Cancer.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- A qualitative exploration of clinicians' experiences and perceptions of a well-being leadership development training program.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Job satisfaction among medical assistants in German general practice: a qualitative study of social, structural and personal factors.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Article
- Stakeholder perspectives on mental health systems and services for emerging adults in Barbados.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Reflections on Family Medicine's First Year of Program Signals and Other New ERAS Features.Family medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a notes-based rapid qualitative analysis method to facilitate implementation.Implementation science communications · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextIn the context of iterative feedback loops to support real-time policy decision making, and an emphasis on speeding up adoption of evidence-based interventions, qualitative healthcare researchers are increasingly expected to produce rapid results and products. Traditional qualitative methods have been adapted for this purpose.
objectiveTo develop and apply a rapid analysis framework in a process evaluation for the VICTORION-Spirit study; a ground-breaking hybrid trial examining real-world delivery of inclisiran-a cholesterol-lowering treatment-in primary care.
designWe developed a rapid analysis framework, using a summary template, to analyse data from semistructured telephone interviews.
settingPrimary care in Greater Manchester, UK.
participantsPatients who had received inclisiran as part of the VICTORION-Spirit trial (56), providers delivering inclisiran (28) and representatives from the Academic Health Science Network (8) participated in the original study.
resultsThe rapid analysis framework we developed and applied comprised six steps: (1) creating a summary template based on the five Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains; (2) test-driving, refining and finalising the summary template; (3) completing the template soon after each interview using field notes; (4) discussing analysis as a team; (5) transferring summaries to a matrix; and (6) using the summary matrix to inform presentations and interim reports for stakeholders. Our rapid analysis framework saved time and improved efficiency, as we were able to feedback barriers to stakeholders in real time via presentations.
conclusionsRapid analysis in applied healthcare research can produce timely and trustworthy findings. Our rapid analysis framework would be useful within studies where there is a need to feedback to stakeholders and adjust implementation strategies accordingly in real time. Thus, supporting successful implementation efforts and accelerating adoption. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04807400, 19/03/2021.
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.