Trial reportBMC primary care2025
Experiences of general practice teams and their patients with clinical research-a mixed-methods process evaluation of the Bavarian Research Practice Network (BayFoNet).
Trial report in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05667207 (Dipsticks and Point-of-care Microscopy to Reduce Antibiotic Use in Women With Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections), which is not on this 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.
Dipsticks and Point-of-care Microscopy to Reduce Antibiotic Use in Women With Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infections: a Cluster-randomized Controlled Pilot Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustainable implementation of practice-based research networks in primary care: a qualitative process evaluation of the Bavarian Research Practice Network (BayFoNet).BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Two sides of the same coin: recruitment performance and perceived workload in primary care trials-insights from the AgeWell.de study.BMC primary care · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPractice-based research networks (PBRNs) have been implemented to support clinical research in German general practice since 2020. General practitioners (GPs) are often critical concerning the feasibility of clinical trials. Among others, high workload, lack of resources in GP teams and little acceptance of the trial requirements by the patients are assumed barriers. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the perspectives of the GP teams and their patients on the set up of BayFoNet during the implementation of the two pilot cluster-randomized trials to improve this collaboration on a sustainable basis.
methodsGPs and medical assistants (MAs) were interviewed using semi-structured interviews based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation research and verbatim transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Patient attitudes were evaluated quantitatively with questionnaires based on the theoretical domains framework using descriptive statistics.
resultsA total of 15 GPs and 15 MAs were interviewed, and 109 complete patient questionnaires were returned. Main facilitators for GPs' active participation in clinical research were networking as well as active participation of GP teams at different levels of the research process. Increased awareness concerning PBRNs might promote a lively network. From the GPs' perspective, lack of motivation among MAs and patients was a perceived barrier to support clinical research in general practice. MAs emphasized their own increase in knowledge and competence as well as the importance of clinical research for improved patient care. In contrast to the GPs, most MAs were not aware of BayFoNet as a network structure. The surveyed patients rated their own capabilities and opportunities to actively participate in the pilot studies as very good. Prior to the implementations of the interventions, some patients experienced some difficulty in defining clear goals for their own participation. DISCUSSION: Increased awareness concerning PBRNs might promote a lively network. Target-group specific dissemination strategies as well as opportunities for GP teams and their patients to participate in clinical research should be elaborated. This might increase the feasibility of clinical trials and the motivation of all participants to conduct clinical trials in general practice.
trial registrationPilot cluster-randomized trial 1 (MicUTI) was prospectively registered on December 19, 2022 at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT05667207); Pilot cluster-randomized trial 2 (IMONEDA) was prospectively registered on April 22, 2022 at www.bfarm.de (DRKS00028805).
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.