ArticleBMJ neurology open2024
Mixed-methods process evaluation of a proactive approach to healthcare in Parkinson's disease-ParkProReakt: a protocol of a hybrid efficacy-implementation study.
Article in BMJ neurology open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractIntroduction: People with Parkinson's disease (PwPD) experience a wide range of motor and non-motor symptoms that have a significant impact on their health and quality of life. Effective care management for PwPD involves monitoring symptoms at home, involving specialised multidisciplinary care providers and enhancing self-management skills. This study protocol describes the process evaluation within a randomised clinical trial to assess the implementation and its impact on patient health outcomes of ParkProReakt-a proactive, multidisciplinary, digitally supported care model for community-dwelling PwPD. Methods and analysis: The hybrid efficacy-implementation study will assess key implementation outcomes using the Medical Research Council framework for complex interventions alongside a randomised controlled trial. A combination of quantitative and qualitative methods will be used to assess process data from care providers and patients. The main process outcomes are fidelity, dose, feasibility and context. Context will be analysed through semistructured interviews and focus groups using the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research. To elucidate potential facilitators and barriers to implementation and to gain deeper insights into the efficacy outcome data, quantitative and qualitative process data will be integrated at an interpretative level using mixed methods. In addition to process evaluation, potential indirect mechanisms of impact will be measured. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the responsible state medical ethics committees in Hesse and Hamburg, Germany. Results will be communicated to the funding body and disseminated through scientific publications. Trial registration: This study was registered with the German Registry for Clinical Studies (DRKS)-number: DRKS00031092.
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.