Final Research Report
View this project's final research report.
Results of This Project
Related Journal Citations
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. Those comments and responses included the following:
- The reviewers requested additional information about how the researchers managed missing data, especially in the first two parts of the project. The researchers explained that the first two parts of the project focused on aggregate metrics that could account for patients who might not be fully involved in their health system and might be receiving their care elsewhere. Because the aggregate metrics themselves could not be missing, the researchers did not feel it was necessary to complete sensitivity analyses or otherwise account for missing data. The researchers did expand their discussion in the limitations section on the effect of missing data on the third part of the project, where they felt such discussion to be very relevant.
- The reviewers asked the researchers to emphasize their findings regarding the continued disparity in hypertension control between White and Black patients, even after the intervention improved hypertension outcomes. The researchers added to the discussion of this finding in their results section.
- The reviewers noted that treatment intensification was defined only as adding additional anti-hypertensive medications to a treatment regimen because the data available for tracking patients did not include sufficient information about medication dose to measure whether there were also dose effects on hypertension. The researchers acknowledged that the lack of information on medication dose in this case demonstrated a limitation of the common data model used by PCORnet.
- The reviewers suggested that the researchers consider issues that might have affected their results in the study comparing two blood pressure home monitoring interventions. The researchers enumerated the issues that could affect interpretation of the study in their discussion, noting that the large drop in blood pressure could be due to regression to the mean, many patients with high blood pressure were taking no medications and there were low response rates from patients.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
- Has Results