Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27619339›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2016

A theory-based process evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial of printed educational messages to increase primary care physicians' prescription of thiazide diuretics for hypertension [ISRCTN72772651].

Justin Presseau, Jeremy M Grimshaw, Jacqueline M Tetroe, Martin P Eccles, Jill J Francis, Gaston Godin, Ian D Graham, Janet E Hux, Marie Johnston, France Légaré and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

13 authors.

Justin PresseauOttawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada.
Jeremy M GrimshawOttawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada. jgrimshaw@ohri.ca.
Jacqueline M TetroeRetired, Ottawa, Canada.
Martin P EcclesInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE2 4AX, England.
Jill J FrancisSchool of Health Sciences, City University London, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, UK.
Gaston GodinFaculty of Nursing, Laval University, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 Avenue de la Medicine, Room 1445, Quebec City, Quebec, G1V 0A6, Canada.
Ian D GrahamOttawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada.
Janet E HuxCanadian Diabetes Association, 522 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2A2, Canada.
Marie JohnstonInstitute of Applied Health Sciences, College of Life Sciences and Medicine, 2nd floor, Health Sciences Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
France LégaréDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, G1K 7P4, Canada.
Louise LemyreSchool of Psychology, University of Ottawa, 120 University, Social Sciences Building FSS-5052, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada.
Nicole RobinsonOttawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada.
Merrick ZwarensteinCentre for Studies in Family Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, 1465 Richmond Street, London, Ontario, N6A 3K7, Canada.

Funding

CIHR FDN 143237CIHR FDN 333392CIHR KTS-73423
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPragmatic trials of implementation interventions focus on evaluating whether an intervention changes professional behaviour under real-world conditions rather than investigating the mechanism through which change occurs. Theory-based process evaluations conducted alongside pragmatic randomised trials address this by assessing whether the intervention changes theoretical constructs proposed to mediate change. The Ontario Printed Educational Materials (PEM) cluster trial was designed to increase family physicians' guideline-recommended prescription of thiazide diuretics. The trial found no intervention effect. Using the theory of planned behaviour (TPB), we hypothesised that changes in thiazide prescribing would be reflected in changes in intention, consistent with changes in attitude and subjective norm, with no change to their perceived behavioural control (PBC), and tested this alongside the RCT.

methodsWe developed and sent TPB postal questionnaires to a random sub-sample of family physicians in each trial arm 2 months before and 6 months after dissemination of the PEMs. We used analysis of covariance to test for group differences using a 2 × 3 factorial design. We content-analysed an open-ended question about perceived barriers to thiazide prescription. Using control group data, we tested whether baseline measures of TPB constructs predicted self-reported thiazide prescribing at follow-up.

resultsFour hundred twenty-six physicians completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires. Baseline scores on measures of TPB constructs were high: intention mean = 5.9 out of 7 (SD = 1.4), attitude mean = 5.8 (SD = 1.1), subjective norm mean = 5.8 (SD = 1.1) and PBC mean = 6.2 (SD = 1.0). The arms did not significantly differ post-intervention on any of the theory-based constructs, suggesting a possible ceiling effect. Content analysis of perceived barriers suggested post-intentional barriers to prescribing thiazides most often focused on specific patient clinical characteristics and potential side effects. Baseline intention (β = 0.63, p < 0.01) but not PBC (β = 0.04, p = 0.78) predicted 42.6 % of the variance in self-reported behaviour at follow-up in the control group.

conclusionsCongruent with the Ontario Printed Educational Messages trial results and aligned with the TPB, we saw no impact of the intervention on any TPB constructs. The theoretical basis of this evaluation suggests possible explanations for the failure of the PEM intervention to change professional behaviour, which can directly inform the design and content of future theory-based PEM interventions to change professional behaviour.

trial registrationISRCTN, Canada ISRCTN72772651.

Indexed as

PamphletsPhysicians, Primary CareFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleOntarioPractice Patterns, Physicians'PrescriptionsProgram EvaluationSodium Chloride Symporter InhibitorsSurveys and QuestionnairesSodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID27619339
PMCPMC5020459

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.