Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39464992›Full record

ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2024

Dea Papajorgji-Taylor, Christina R Sheppler, Carmit McMullen, Patrick J O'Connor, Rachel Gold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Dea Papajorgji-TaylorCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, US.
Christina R ShepplerCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, US.
Carmit McMullenCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, US.
Patrick J O'ConnorHealthPartners Institute, Bloomington, MN, United States.
Rachel GoldCenter for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, US.

Funding

CV Wizard: Does a Prioritized, Point-of-Care Clinical Decision Support Tool Improve Guideline-Based CVD Risk Factor Control in Safety Net Clinics?R01HL133793 · NHLBI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GOLD, RACHEL · 2017 to 2021
$3.8M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL133793
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Qualitatively examine how community health clinics delivered cardiovascular disease (CVD) preventive care during COVID-19 using virtual care and related adaptations. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2021-2022 with nine clinician leaders from four clinics across the country that share an electronic health record. Interviews covered: (1) the pandemic's impact on preventive care delivery, (2) the adaptation and role of virtual care, and (3) management of CVD risk in this context. Collected data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Results: Staff reported substantial pros and cons to virtual care for CVD risk management. It was seen as useful for general check-ins with patients. However, without current laboratory results and vital measurements, providers found it challenging to assess patient CVD risk and direct care accordingly. Conclusion: Findings add to the evolving evidence base that the necessary pivot to virtual care during the pandemic spurred innovations but also created limitations and delays in delivering appropriate preventive care.

Indexed as

Community health centersCOVID-19heart disease risk factorspreventive medicinequalitative researchtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39464992
PMCPMC11504812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.