↓ Skip to main content

Supporting Practices to Adopt Registry-Based Care (SPARC): protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Supporting Practices to Adopt Registry-Based Care (SPARC): protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Implementation Science, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0232-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca S Etz, Rosalind E Keith, Anna M Maternick, Karen L Stein, Roy T Sabo, Melissa S Hayes, Purvi Sevak, John Holland, Jesse C Crosson

Abstract

Diabetes is predicted to increase in incidence by 42% from 1995 to 2025. Although most adults with diabetes seek care from primary care practices, adherence to treatment guidelines in these settings is not optimal. Many practices lack the infrastructure to monitor patient adherence to recommended treatment and are slow to implement changes critical for effective management of patients with chronic conditions. Supporting Practices to Adopt Registry-Based Care (SPARC) will evaluate effectiveness and sustainability of a low-cost intervention designed to support work process change in primary care practices and enhance focus on population-based care through implementation of a diabetes registry. SPARC is a two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 30 primary care practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN). Participating practices (including control groups) will be introduced to population health concepts and tools for work process redesign and registry adoption at a meeting of practice-level implementation champions. Practices randomized to the intervention will be assigned study peer mentors, receive a list of specific milestones, and have access to a physician informaticist. Peer mentors are clinicians who successfully implemented registries in their practices and will help champions in the intervention practices throughout the implementation process. During the first year, peer mentors will contact intervention practices monthly and visit them quarterly. Control group practices will not receive support or guidance for registry implementation. We will use a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design to guide collection of medical record, participant observation, and semistructured interview data in control and intervention practices at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. We will use grounded theory and a template-guided approach using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to analyze qualitative data on contextual factors related to registry adoption. We will assess intervention effectiveness by comparing changes in patient-level hemoglobin A1c scores from baseline to year 1 between intervention and control practices. Findings will enhance our understanding of how to leverage existing practice resources to improve diabetes care in primary care practices by implementing and using a registry. SPARC has the potential to validate the effectiveness of low-cost implementation strategies that target practice change in primary care. NCT02318108.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 18%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 13%
Computer Science 5 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 21 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2015.
All research outputs
#14,158,507
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,481
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,678
of 264,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#44
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,944 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.