Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented, and the researchers made changes or provided responses. The comments and responses included the following:

  • Reviewers expressed concern about the overinterpretation of findings based on a large number of comparisons. Since statistical comparisons were not adjusted for multiple-hypothesis testing, the researchers revised the text to emphasize that outcomes based on multiple comparisons should be interpreted with caution. They also emphasized against overinterpreting marginally significant findings.
  • Given that the tested intervention did not seem to be effective, reviewers asked for insights on why the intervention did not work as hoped. The researchers added comments from patient participants and providers to their report. The researchers also noted that the increase in self-reported patient anxiety associated with the coaching intervention was not a surprise to patient stakeholders. The researchers noted that extra attention may have sensitized patients to their health condition and motivated them to use more healthcare services.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

Project Information

Donna Lynne Carden, MD
University of Florida
$2,032,459
10.25302/07.2020.IHS.130601451
An Emergency Department-to-Home Intervention to Improve Quality of Life and Reduce Hospital Use

Key Dates

December 2013
December 2018
2013
2018

Study Registration Information

Tags

Has Results
Award Type
Health Conditions Health Conditions These are the broad terms we use to categorize our funded research studies; specific diseases or conditions are included within the appropriate larger category. Note: not all of our funded projects focus on a single disease or condition; some touch on multiple diseases or conditions, research methods, or broader health system interventions. Such projects won’t be listed by a primary disease/condition and so won’t appear if you use this filter tool to find them. View Glossary
Populations Populations PCORI is interested in research that seeks to better understand how different clinical and health system options work for different people. These populations are frequently studied in our portfolio or identified as being of interest by our stakeholders. View Glossary
Funding Opportunity Type
Intervention Strategy Intervention Strategies PCORI funds comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) studies that compare two or more options or approaches to health care, or that compare different ways of delivering or receiving care. View Glossary
Research Priority Area
State State The state where the project originates, or where the primary institution or organization is located. View Glossary
Last updated: March 4, 2022