Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Comparison of Electronic Physician Prompts versus Waitroom Case-Finding on Clinical Trial Enrollment
57
Zitationen
4
Autoren
2008
Jahr
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recruiting patients into clinical research protocols is challenging. Electronic medical record (EMR) systems capable of prompting clinicians may facilitate enrollment. OBJECTIVE: To compare an EMR-based clinician prompt versus a wait-room-based case-finding strategy at enrolling patients into a clinical trial. DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison of recruitment data from two trials to treat anxiety disorders in primary care. Both studies utilized similar enrollment criteria, intervention strategies, and the same four practice sites and EMR system. PARTICIPANTS: Patients referred by their (primary care physicians) PCPs in response to an EMR prompt (recruited 1/2005-10/2006), and patients enrolled by research assistants stationed in practice waiting rooms (7/2000-4/2002). MEASUREMENTS: Referral counts, patients' baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Over a 22-month period, EMR-prompted PCPs referred 794 patients and 176 (22%) met study inclusion criteria and enrolled, compared to 8,095 patients approached by wait room-based recruiters of whom 193 (2.4%) enrolled. Subjects enrolled by EMR-prompted PCPs were more likely to be non-white (23% vs 5%; P < 0.001), male (28% vs 18%; P = 0.03), and have higher anxiety levels than those recruited by wait-room recruiters (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: EMR systems prompting clinicians to refer patients with specific characteristics are an efficient recruitment tool with critical implications for increasing minority participation in clinical research.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects
2003 · 10.822 Zit.
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
2013 · 7.012 Zit.
Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials
1995 · 5.586 Zit.
The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
2020 · 5.435 Zit.
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
2019 · 4.809 Zit.