ArticleGlobal advances in integrative medicine and health
Development and Outcomes of a Provider-Driven, Online Continuing Education Program on Integrative Palliative Care: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Global advances in integrative medicine and health. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Integrative therapies are increasingly in demand for both symptom management and quality of life in palliative care (PC) populations. Multidisciplinary PC professionals need continuing education/continuing medical education (CE/CME) to keep current on the evidence-informed use of integrative therapies in PC planning. Objectives: (1) Elicit input from multidisciplinary PC providers on needs for CE/CME content on integrative care, and indicators of implementation for use in impact assessment. (2) Produce an online CE/CME program responsive to provider input. (3) Assess program impact on PC providers in a randomized controlled trial. Methods: Focus groups with 47 multidisciplinary PC personnel assessed needs for CE/CME content and identified practice-related behaviors indicating implementation of integrative care. Qualitative analysis then informed development a 9-hour CE/CME program, and identified candidate items for an outcome measure (Integrative Practice Assessment) to assess impact. Validation testing followed with 63 new subjects. A randomized, waitlist-controlled trial then assessed program impact on (1) confidence understanding evidence-informed use of integrative therapies in PC, and (2) implementation of practice behaviors that promote integrative care. Results: 213 subjects were randomized and 170 provided follow-up data on program impact. Subjects' confidence (10-point scale) understanding safety considerations increased from 5.4 to 8.7; recommending modalities, from 4.2 to 8.3; and explaining modalities, from 4.8 to 8.5. Direct actions promoting integrative care in the last 10 patient encounters increased (12.2 to 17.9). Indirect actions taken in the work setting increased in the past month to advocate integrative therapies (from 5.7 to 9.1), and to promote organizational change (from 10.9 to 18.2). (All outcomes Conclusion: This provider-driven CE/CME program led to significant positive changes in practitioners' self-efficacy and implementation of integrative care practices in PC settings. The results indicate that CE/CME can have measurable impacts that benefit providers and may potentially impact patients, families and the culture of care.
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.