Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42920163›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2026

Comparing different forms of structured follow-up support in the treatment of multiple health risks for chronic disease: a randomized controlled trial protocol.

Emily R Dunston, Amy G Huebschmann, Ermyas Birru, Michaela Brtnikova, Bryan S Ford, Rebekah Gomes, Kiana A White, Andrea Nederveld, Demetria M Bolden, Monica Perez Jolles and 7 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07569224 (Testing the Impact of the My Own Health Report Intervention With 3 Distinct Options for Structured Follow-up as Compared to a Control Condition), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07569224 narecruitingnot on this map

Testing the Impact of the My Own Health Report Intervention With 3 Distinct Options for Structured Follow-up as Compared to a Control Condition

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Colorado, DenverRan2026 to 2029Enrolled1,000ConditionsImplementation Strategy Bundles for Structured Follow-upArmsProviding reminder and resources via messages, Reminder and resources sent via navigation, Regular care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Emily R Dunston *Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2482-0962
Amy G Huebschmann *Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA. amy.huebschmann@cuanschutz.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9329-3142
Ermyas BirruAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9393-2533
Michaela BrtnikovaAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2805-6490
Bryan S FordAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-7831-3352
Rebekah GomesAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-0230-7730
Kiana A WhiteAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-7442-2436
Andrea NederveldAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4121-4278
Demetria M BoldenDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7415-8631
Monica Perez JollesAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7855-456X
Elena T Broaddus-SheaAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4544-3529
Katy E TrinkleyAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2041-7404
Debra P RitzwollerKaiser Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7116-8458
Liza M CreelAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1222-678X
Jun YingAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7693-4243
Allison J L'HottaAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7825-2492
Russell E GlasgowAdult and Child Center for Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado Anschutz, Aurora, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4218-3231

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care clinics need effective, low-cost tools to screen for and address multiple health risks - and technology can provide important efficiencies. My Own Health Report (MOHR) is a web-based intervention with 3 core functions: (1) risk flagging; (2) goal-setting for patient-prioritized risks; and (3) providing resources. A prior randomized trial in primary care settings showed that MOHR was feasible and effective. However, we identified two key gaps: a need for a flexible menu of delivery options to adopt and sustain MOHR and a pragmatic way to provide structured follow-up. METHODS/

designWe developed and pilot-tested two distinct primary implementation strategies to provide structured follow-up: the first primary strategy, termed "Reminder-Resource message (R

conclusionsWe expect the implementation strategies compared will produce different levels of representative engagement, behavior change, cost, and practice value. These findings will inform pragmatic ways to improve outcomes important to patients, primary care, and society. TRIAL REGISTRATION# AT CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT07569224 (Registration date: 04/29/2026).

Indexed as

Reminder SystemsAdherence InterventionsChronic DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansImplementation ScienceMotivationPrimary Health CareResearch DesignText MessagingCancer preventionCostsEngagementFollow-up supportImplementation strategiesMulti-behavior changeNavigationNudgePragmatic Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)Whole person health

Identifiers

PMID42920163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.