ArticleBMJ open2013
Effectiveness and uptake of screening programmes for coronary heart disease and diabetes: a realist review of design components used in interventions.
Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Are interventions to increase the uptake of screening for cardiovascular disease risk factors effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC family practice · 2017Pooled it
- The effectiveness of interventions used to improve general health check uptake by the older adult population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Unravelling the potential of social prescribing in individual-level type 2 diabetes prevention: a mixed-methods realist evaluation.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- How universal are universal preschool health checks? An observational study using routine data from New Zealand's B4 School Check.BMJ open · 2019Observational
- Interventions to increase access to or uptake of physical health screening in people with severe mental illness: a realist review.BMJ open · 2018Review
- Google Trends can improve surveillance of Type 2 diabetes.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Article
- GPs' perspectives on managing the NHS Health Check in primary care: a qualitative evaluation of implementation in one area of England.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Interventions that support the creation of dementia friendly environments in health care: protocol for a realist review.Systematic reviews · 2015Article
- Be SMART: examining the experience of implementing the NHS Health Check in UK primary care.BMC family practice · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate behavioural components and strategies associated with increased uptake and effectiveness of screening for coronary heart disease and diabetes with an implementation science focus.
designRealist review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and reference chaining. Searches limited to English language studies published since 1990. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible studies evaluated interventions designed to increase the uptake of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes screening and examined behavioural and/or strategic designs. Studies were excluded if they evaluated changes in risk factors or cost-effectiveness only.
resultsIn 12 eligible studies, several different intervention designs and evidence-based strategies were evaluated. Salient themes were effects of feedback on behaviour change or benefits of health dialogues over simple feedback. Studies provide mixed evidence about the benefits of these intervention constituents, which are suggested to be situation and design specific, broadly supporting their use, but highlighting concerns about the fidelity of intervention delivery, raising implementation science issues. Three studies examined the effects of informed choice or loss versus gain frame invitations, finding no effect on screening uptake but highlighting opportunistic screening as being more successful for recruiting higher CVD and diabetes risk patients than an invitation letter, with no differences in outcomes once recruited. Two studies examined differences between attenders and non-attenders, finding higher risk factors among non-attenders and higher diagnosed CVD and diabetes among those who later dropped out of longitudinal studies.
conclusionsIf the risk and prevalence of these diseases are to be reduced, interventions must take into account what we know about effective health behaviour change mechanisms, monitor delivery by trained professionals and examine the possibility of tailoring programmes according to contexts such as risk level to reach those most in need. Further research is needed to determine the best strategies for lifelong approaches to screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.