The development and evaluation of the cardiovascular assessment screening program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An exploratory mixed methods study, with the philosophical basis of pragmatism and interpretive description, was used to develop, implement, and evaluate an intervention called the Cardiovascular Assessment Screening Program (CASP) to address the underutilization of clinical practice guidelines for cardiovascular screening. The Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) Framework with guideline adaptation was used to guide the study. METHODS: In phase 1, the qualitative study, ten interviews and five focus groups were conducted with healthcare providers (HCPs), managers, and the public to gain different perspectives to inform the development of CASP. In phase 2, the quantitative study, CASP was tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with eight nurse practitioners (NPs) and 167 patients aged 40-74 years without previously diagnosed cardiovascular disease (CVD). The intervention group implemented CASP while the control group provided usual care. Phase 3 integration examined the results from phases 1 and 2. RESULTS: From the focus groups and interviews conducted in the qualitative phase, themes emerged related to the barriers to, facilitators of, and strategies for CVD screening in the local context. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was applied to the themes to identify relevant behaviour change techniques and modes of delivery, from which specific intervention components for CASP were developed. Findings from Phase 2, the RCT, showed a statistically and clinically significant difference between the NP intervention group compared to the control group in terms of comprehensiveness of screening, RR = 43.9, 95% CI [13.4, 144.2], p < .0001. The NPs in the intervention group were able to identify multiple risk factors; determine their patients’ level of CVD risk; identify NPs’ and patients’ priorities for action; and encourage individualized goal-setting with patients for heart health. In Phase 3, the integration of results from phases 1 and 2 confirmed and refined strategies for knowledge translation. The mixed methods study results are reported in Manuscript 1, while Manuscript 2 focuses primarily on Phase 2, the results from the RCT. Manuscript 3 discusses strategies to address recruitment issues of HCPs such as nurses and NPs, as participants in research studies. CONCLUSION: CASP was effective and can be used by HCPs and patients for CVD screening and management utilizing current guidelines to identify risk factors and promote relevant actions to reduce CVD risk and promote healthy aging.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.054 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".