MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411443950 · doi:10.1186/s13012-025-01433-8

Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation in Health

2025· article· en· W4411443950 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueImplementation Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFeinberg School of MedicineUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical CampusUniversity of TorontoJohns Hopkins UniversityNorthwestern UniversityToronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health NetworkUniversity of WashingtonJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsHealth informaticsHealth administrationHealth services researchMedicinePublic healthHealth policyLibrary scienceEnvironmental healthNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundUnhealthy alcohol use is a leading cause of preventable deaths and is associated with many social and health problems.Less than a third of people who visit primary care providers in the US are asked about or ever discuss alcohol use with a health professional.The first aim of the Stop Unhealthy Alcohol Use Now (STUN) trial was to evaluate the effect of primary care practice facilitation on uptake of evidencebased screening and brief counseling for unhealthy alcohol use.Methods STUN was a hybrid implementation effectiveness trial that enrolled primary care practices across the state of North Carolina.Enrolled practices received twelve months of practice facilitation, including quality improvement coaching, electronic health record (EHR) support (e.g., using available tools, creating smart phrases or flowsheets, retrieving data), and training on screening and counseling for unhealthy alcohol use.The primary outcome measures included the change from three months prior to baseline through the second quarter (i.e., months 4-6) in the number and percentage of adult patients (1) who were screened for unhealthy alcohol use and (2) who received brief counseling after a positive screening result.For count data, we used negative binomial mixed-effects models to assess trajectories; models accounted for clinic size.For percentage data, we utilized linear mixed models.Findings Twenty one practices serving 54,294 patients reported implementation effectiveness data.Screening rates increased significantly, from an average of 200 to over 400 adults per quarter per practice (from 20% to 50% of adult patients, p < 0.01).Additionally, the number and percentage of patients who received a brief intervention after a positive screening result increased from 0 to 12 adults per quarter per practice (from 0% to 40% of adults with a positive screen, p<0.01).After month 6, assessment of the implementation effectiveness outcomes showed reasonable sustainment.There was significant variability across participating practices for screening and counseling outcomes.Implications for D&I Research: Our findings provide evidence for the positive effect of practice facilitation on uptake of evidence-based screening and counseling for unhealthy alcohol use when delivered to small to medium-sized primary care practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.407
GPT teacher head0.715
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImplementation ScienceSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207