ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
Email-Based Nudges and Guideline-Concordant Statin Prescribing in a Federally Qualified Health Center Network: A Prospective Quality Improvement Initiative.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. 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
ObjectivesThis quality improvement project evaluated trends in guideline-concordant statin prescription rates during implementation of an email-based nudge intervention among healthcare providers at a large FQHC network.MethodsEligible encounters included patients meeting UDS guideline criteria but not receiving treatment. On the morning of each eligible visit, providers received an email nudge. Providers were categorized as early adopters or non-early adopters, with early adopters defined as opening >50% of emails during this period. Outcomes included provider-level prescribing rates, and encounter-level prescribing stratified by email engagement. This study was designed, conducted, and reported in accordance with SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines.ResultsSeventy-five providers who received ≥5 nudges within the first three months were included in the early adopter analysis, and a total of 124 providers with 1,236 unique patient encounters were analyzed over 12 months for encounter-level prescribing rates. Guideline-concordant statin prescribing was modestly higher over time in both groups (early adopters: 85.6% to 89.2%, p < 0.001; non-early adopters: 83.3% to 89.4%, p < 0.001), with no significant evidence of differences between groups over the 1-year period (p = 0.734). At the encounter level, while successful prescribing occurred in 21.8% of visits when the email was opened prior to the encounter compared with 19.5% when it was not opened, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.442).ConclusionGuideline-concordant statin prescribing was modestly higher over the study period, though no differential association by email engagement was observed. Given that email nudges are scalable and low-cost, they have the potential to serve as useful adjunctive tools, however further research is needed in settings lacking EHR-integrated alerts or with lower baseline adherence.
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.