Trial reportPLoS medicine2014
Effect of an educational toolkit on quality of care: a pragmatic cluster randomized trial.
Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 8 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.
Evaluation of a Toolkit to Improve Cardiovascular Disease Screening and Treatment for People With Type 2 Diabetes
Evaluation of a Toolkit to Improve Cardiovascular Disease Screening and Treatment for People With Diabetes
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality improvement strategies for diabetes care: Effects on outcomes for adults living with diabetes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Nudge strategies to improve healthcare providers' implementation of evidence-based guidelines, policies and practices: a systematic review of trials included within Cochrane systematic reviews.Implementation science : IS · 2020Pooled it
- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Implementation Strategies for Non-communicable Disease Guidelines in Primary Health Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions to increase attendance for diabetic retinopathy screening.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Tools developed and disseminated by guideline producers to promote the uptake of their guidelines.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- What is the effectiveness of printed educational materials on primary care physician knowledge, behaviour, and patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses.Implementation science : IS · 2015Pooled it
- The effectiveness of toolkits as knowledge translation strategies for integrating evidence into clinical care: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2015Pooled it
- Printed educational materials directed at Ontario family physicians do not improve adherence to guideline recommendations for diabetes management: a pragmatic, factorial, cluster randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN72772651].BMC family practice · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Vulvodynia Viewed From a Disease Prevention Framework: Insights From Patient Perspectives.Sexual medicine · 2020Article
- Child and adolescent psychiatrists' reported monitoring behaviors for second-generation antipsychotics.Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrinted educational materials for clinician education are one of the most commonly used approaches for quality improvement. The objective of this pragmatic cluster randomized trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of an educational toolkit focusing on cardiovascular disease screening and risk reduction in people with diabetes. METHODS AND
findingsAll 933,789 people aged ≥40 years with diagnosed diabetes in Ontario, Canada were studied using population-level administrative databases, with additional clinical outcome data collected from a random sample of 1,592 high risk patients. Family practices were randomly assigned to receive the educational toolkit in June 2009 (intervention group) or May 2010 (control group). The primary outcome in the administrative data study, death or non-fatal myocardial infarction, occurred in 11,736 (2.5%) patients in the intervention group and 11,536 (2.5%) in the control group (p = 0.77). The primary outcome in the clinical data study, use of a statin, occurred in 700 (88.1%) patients in the intervention group and 725 (90.1%) in the control group (p = 0.26). Pre-specified secondary outcomes, including other clinical events, processes of care, and measures of risk factor control, were also not improved by the intervention. A limitation is the high baseline rate of statin prescribing in this population.
conclusionsThe educational toolkit did not improve quality of care or cardiovascular outcomes in a population with diabetes. Despite being relatively easy and inexpensive to implement, printed educational materials were not effective. The study highlights the need for a rigorous and scientifically based approach to the development, dissemination, and evaluation of quality improvement interventions.
trial registrationhttp://www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01411865 and NCT01026688.
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.