Trial reportBMC primary care2025
Exposure to clinical decision support and training increases primary care clinician confidence in managing cognitive impairment care but not confidence to diagnose.
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 NCT05723523 (A Technology-Driven Intervention to Improve Early Detection and Management of Cognitive Impairment), which is not on this 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.
A Technology-Driven Intervention to Improve Early Detection and Management of Cognitive Impairment
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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCognitive impairment (CI) is projected to significantly increase as the population ages. While primary care clinicians are often the first point of contact for patients with cognitive decline, many clinicians report significant barriers to addressing CI in primary care, including lack of time, lack of established workflow, and low confidence in diagnosing and managing CI.
methodsTo address these barriers, a CI clinician decision support system (CI-CDSS) was developed and is being tested in a cluster randomized, controlled clinical trial in 38 primary care clinics. A secondary aim of the study was to assess whether the CI-CDSS increased clinician confidence in CI diagnosis and management, as measured by surveys administered before and 8-months after CI-CDSS implementation. Primary outcome results of CI diagnosis are awaiting the end of the follow-up period; however, clinician surveys are complete and reported here. The odds ratio (OR) for the interaction between survey time and study arm, estimated in a generalized linear mixed model, tested the significance of change in clinician confidence across study arms. The average marginal effect (AME), estimated in a generalized estimating equation, provided a treatment effect estimate.
resultsWhile self-reported use of the CI-CDSS was modest (32% remembered the tool and 65% of those used it), those who used it reported high satisfaction (97% said the tool helped provide better CI care). Clinicians in CI-CDSS clinics reported increased confidence in managing CI care relative to usual care (UC) clinicians (AME = 16.8, OR = 2.24 [1.05, 4.80]). Trending, but not significant, increases in clinician confidence in diagnosing CI were observed in CI-CDSS clinics when compared to usual care (e.g., distinguishing types of dementia AME = 9.8, OR = 2.08[0.84, 5.14]).
conclusionsThe results of this study demonstrate the potential value of a CI-CDSS in promoting primary care clinician confidence in caring for and diagnosing patients with CI.
trial registrationThis trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05723523 on 02/02/2023.
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.