Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 165

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.

Does a mailed continuing education program improve physician performance? Results of a randomized trial in antihypertensive care

C. E. Evans·1986·JAMA

Abstract

Evidence is sparse concerning the value of the "educational" materials that physicians receive in the mail. We conducted a randomized trial of a mailed continuing education program on hypertension for primary care physicians. Although formal pretesting documented that the program led to significant improvements in physician knowledge over the short term, the current study showed no lasting effect on physician knowledge (mean scores on an end-of-study questionnaire were 50% and 52% for study and control physicians, respectively) and no influence on performance in lowering the blood pressures of patients referred from screening (mean blood pressure drop for study patients, 12.2/10.4 mm Hg vs 13.0/10.6 mm Hg for control patients). The chance that we missed a difference in diastolic blood pressure as great as 3 mm Hg is less than 5%. Resources spent on instructional materials mailed to physicians may be wasted.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1001/jama.255.4.501

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 165

Metadata

Authors
Evans, C. E.
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association
Published
1986-01-24
Volume
255
Issue
4
Pages
501-504
ISSN
0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4255431309
Cited by
165
References
0
FWCI
6.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Does a mailed continuing education program improve physician performance? Results of a randomized trial in antihypertensive care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.255.4.501
The paper
Evans, C. E. (1986). Does a mailed continuing education program improve physician performance? Results of a randomized trial in antihypertensive care. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.255.4.501

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.