ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2026
Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the implementation of a clinical workflow designed to identify, refer, and connect insufficiently active patients to health coaching.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care is well-positioned to connect patients to physical activity (PA) interventions but is underutilized. PURPOSE: To describe the implementation of a clinical workflow designed to identify, refer, and connect insufficiently active patients to health coaching (HC).
methodsFrom June 2023 to March 2025, a physical inactivity screening and referral workflow was implemented in six primary care clinics within a large university healthcare system. Guided by the RE-AIM framework, descriptive analyses focused on the number and proportion of patients who (i) were screened for inactivity, (ii) were identified as insufficiently active, (iii) expressed interest in HC, (iv) were referred to HC, and (v) were connected to HC. We also assessed provider uptake, evaluated workflow modifications, and computed measures of central tendency and dispersion during the final year.
resultsMonthly, a mean (SD) of 1771 (153) patients were screened. Of these, 1013 (102), or 57.1%, were insufficiently active. A median of 288 patients (29%) expressed interest in HC, of which 243 (89%) were referred. A median of 20 patients (10% of those referred) were connected to HC monthly. Among providers with patients requesting a referral, 86% referred. Workflow changes were followed by shifts in metrics, while variability remained low during the final year of evaluation.
conclusionThis workflow identifies and refers many insufficiently active patients to HC. However, there is a gap between patient HC referral and connection to support. Identifying and implementing strategies to overcome barriers and improve patient connection rates is a critical next step.
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.