De-implementing Prolonged Rest Advice for Concussion in Primary Care Settings: A Pilot Stepped Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a de-implementation intervention to support return-to-activity guideline use after concussion. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Family physicians in community practice (n = 21 at 5 clinics). DESIGN: Pilot stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with qualitative interviews. Training on new guidelines for return to activity after concussion was provided in education outreach visits. MAIN MEASURES: The primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment, retention, and postencounter form completion (physicians prospectively recorded what they did for each new patient with concussion). Efficacy indicators included a knowledge test and guideline compliance based on postencounter form data. Qualitative interviews covered Theoretical Domains Framework elements. RESULTS: Recruitment, retention, and postencounter form completion rates all fell below feasibility benchmarks. Family physicians demonstrated increased knowledge about the return-to-activity guideline (M = 8.8 true-false items correct out of 10 after vs 6.3 before) and improved guideline adherence (86% after vs 25% before) after the training. Qualitative interviews revealed important barriers (eg, beliefs about contraindications) and facilitators (eg, patient handouts) to behavior change. CONCLUSIONS: Education outreach visits might facilitate de-implementation of prolonged rest advice after concussion, but methodological changes will be necessary to improve the feasibility of a larger trial. The qualitative findings highlight opportunities for refining the intervention.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".