Teri Malo

Dr. Teri Malo


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2017 in Pediatrics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NBNoel Brewer
Noel Brewer
MHMegan E. Hall
Megan E. Hall
TMTeri Malo
Teri Malo
MGMelissa B. Gilkey
Melissa B. Gilkey
BQBeth Quinn
Beth Quinn
CLChristine Lathren
Christine Lathren
OBJECTIVE: Improving provider recommendations is critical to addressing low human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination coverage. Thus, we sought to determine the effectiveness of training providers to improve their recommendations using either presumptive “announcements” or participatory “conversations.” METHODS: In 2015, we conducted a parallel-group randomized clinical trial with 30 pediatric and family medicine clinics in central North Carolina. We randomized clinics to receive no training (control), announcement training, or conversation training. Announcements are brief statements that assume parents are ready to vaccinate, whereas conversations engage parents in open-ended discussions. A physician led the 1-hour, in-clinic training. The North Carolina Immunization Registry provided data on the primary trial outcome: 6-month coverage change in HPV vaccine initiation (≥1 dose) for adolescents aged 11 or 12 years. RESULTS: The immunization registry attributed 17 173 adolescents aged 11 or 12 to the 29 clinics still open at 6-months posttraining. Six-month increases in HPV vaccination coverage were larger for patients in clinics that received announcement training versus those in control clinics (5.4% difference, 95% confidence interval: 1.1%–9.7%). Stratified analyses showed increases for both girls (4.6% difference) and boys (6.2% difference). Patients in clinics receiving conversation training did not differ from those in control clinics with respect to changes in HPV vaccination coverage. Neither training was effective for changing coverage for other vaccination outcomes or for adolescents aged 13 through 17 (n = 37 796). CONCLUSIONS: Training providers to use announcements resulted in a clinically meaningful increase in HPV vaccine initiation among young adolescents.

1 December 2018 in JAMA Internal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MDMichael K. Dougherty
Michael K. Dougherty
ABAlison T. Brenner
Alison T. Brenner
SCSeth D. Crockett
Seth D. Crockett
SGShivani Gupta
Shivani Gupta
SWStephanie B. Wheeler
Stephanie B. Wheeler
DRDaniel S. Reuland
Daniel S. Reuland
Importance Colorectal cancer screening (CRC) is recommended by all major US medical organizations but remains underused. Objective To identify interventions associated with increasing CRC screening rates and their effect sizes. Data Sources PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from January 1, 1996, to August 31, 2017. Key search terms includedcolorectal cancerandscreening. Study Selection Randomized clinical trials of US-based interventions in clinical settings designed to improve CRC screening test completion in average-risk adults. Data Extraction and Synthesis At least 2 investigators independently extracted data and appraised each study’s risk of bias. Where sufficient data were available, random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain either a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD) for screening completion for each type of intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was completion of CRC screening. Examination included interventions to increase completion of (1) initial CRC screening by any recommended modality, (2) colonoscopy after an abnormal initial screening test result, and (3) continued rounds of annual fecal blood tests (FBTs). Results The main review included 73 randomized clinical trials comprising 366 766 patients at low or medium risk of bias. Interventions that were associated with increased CRC screening completion rates compared with usual care included FBT outreach (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.81-2.81; RD, 22%; 95% CI, 17%-27%), patient navigation (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.64-2.46; RD, 18%; 95% CI, 13%-23%), patient education (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.06-1.36; RD, 4%; 95% CI, 1%-6%), patient reminders (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41; RD, 3%; 95% CI, 0%-5%), clinician interventions of academic detailing (RD, 10%; 95% CI, 3%-17%), and clinician reminders (RD, 13%; 95% CI, 8%-19%). Combinations of interventions (clinician interventions or navigation added to FBT outreach) were associated with greater increases than single components (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29; RD, 7%; 95% CI, 3%-11%). Repeated mailed FBTs with navigation were associated with increased annual FBT completion (RR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.91-2.29; RD, 39%; 95% CI, 29%-49%). Patient navigation was not associated with colonoscopy completion after an initial abnormal screening test result (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.60; RD, 14%; 95% CI, 0%-29%). Conclusions and Relevance Fecal blood test outreach and patient navigation, particularly in the context of multicomponent interventions, were associated with increased CRC screening rates in US trials. Fecal blood test outreach should be incorporated into population-based screening programs. More research is needed on interventions to increase adherence to continued FBTs, follow-up of abnormal initial screening test results, and cost-effectiveness and other implementation barriers for more intensive interventions, such as navigation.

1 October 2018 in JAMA Internal Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ABAlison T. Brenner
Alison T. Brenner
TMTeri Malo
Teri Malo
MMMarjorie Margolis
Marjorie Margolis
JLJennifer Elston Lafata
Jennifer Elston Lafata
SJShynah James
Shynah James
DRDaniel S. Reuland
Daniel S. Reuland
Importance The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that shared decision making (SDM) involving a thorough discussion of benefits and harms should occur between clinicians and patients before initiating lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services require an SDM visit using a decision aid as a prerequisite for LCS coverage. However, little is known about how SDM about LCS occurs in practice. Objective To assess the quality of SDM about the initiation of LCS in clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants A qualitative content analysis was performed of transcribed conversations between primary care or pulmonary care physicians and 14 patients presumed to be eligible for LCS, recorded between April 1, 2014, and March 1, 2018, that were identified within a large database. Main Outcomes and Measures Independent observer ratings of communication behaviors of physicians using the OPTION (Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making) scale, a validated 12-item measure of SDM (total score, 0-100 points, where 0 indicates no evidence of SDM and 100 indicates evidence of SDM at the highest skill level); time spent discussing LCS during visits; and evidence of decision aid use. Results A total of 14 conversations about initiating LCS were identified; 9 patients were women, and 5 patients were men; the mean (SD) patient age was 63.9 (5.1) years; 7 patients had Medicare, and 8 patients were current smokers. Half the conversations were conducted by primary care physicians. The mean total OPTION score for the 14 LCS conversations was 6 on a scale of 0 to 100 (range, 0-17). None of the conversations met the minimum skill criteria for 8 of the 12 SDM behaviors. Physicians universally recommended LCS. Discussion of harms (such as false positives and their sequelae or overdiagnosis) was virtually absent. The mean total visit length of a discussion was 13:07 minutes (range, 3:48-27:09 minutes). The mean time spent discussing LCS was 0:59 minute (range, 0:16-2:19 minutes), or 8% of the total visit time (range, 1%-18%). There was no evidence that decision aids or other patient education materials for LCS were used. Conclusions and Relevance In this small sample of recorded encounters about initiating LCS, the observed quality of SDM was poor and explanation of potential harms of screening was virtually nonexistent. Time spent discussing LCS was minimal, and there was no evidence that decision aids were used. Although these findings are preliminary, they raise concerns that SDM for LCS in practice may be far from what is intended by guidelines.

1 November 2015 in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MGMelissa B. Gilkey
Melissa B. Gilkey
TMTeri Malo
Teri Malo
PSParth D. Shah
Parth D. Shah
MHMegan E. Hall
Megan E. Hall
NBNoel T. Brewer
Noel T. Brewer
Background: Improving the quality of physicians' recommendations for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination is critical to addressing low coverage. Thus, we sought to describe HPV vaccine communication practices among primary care physicians. Methods: Pediatricians and family physicians (n = 776) completed our national online survey in 2014. We assessed the quality of their HPV vaccine recommendations on strength of endorsement (i.e., saying the vaccine is important), timeliness (recommending it by ages 11–12), consistency (recommending it routinely vs. using a risk-based approach), and urgency (recommending same-day vaccination). Results: A sizeable minority of physicians reported that they do not strongly endorse HPV vaccine (27%) or deliver timely recommendations for girls (26%) or boys (39%). Many physicians (59%) used a risk-based approach to recommending HPV vaccine, and only half (51%) usually recommended same-day vaccination. Overall recommendation quality was lower among physicians who were uncomfortable talking about HPV vaccine or who believed parents did not value it. Quality was higher among physicians who began discussions by saying the child was due for HPV vaccine versus giving information or eliciting questions. Conclusion: Many physicians in our national sample reported recommending HPV vaccine inconsistently, behind schedule, or without urgency. These practices likely contribute to under-immunization among adolescents, and may convey ambivalence to parents. Impact: As one of the first studies to assess multiple aspects of recommendation quality, these findings can inform the many state and national initiatives that aim to improve communication about HPV vaccine so as to address the persistent underuse of a powerful tool for cancer prevention. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(11); 1673–9. ©2015 AACR. See related commentary by Zimet, p. 1643.

1 November 2011 in Vaccine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SVSusan Vadaparampil
Susan Vadaparampil
JKJessica A. Kahn
Jessica A. Kahn
DSDaniel Salmon
Daniel Salmon
JLJi-Hyun Lee
Ji-Hyun Lee
GQGwendolyn Quinn
Gwendolyn Quinn
AGAnna R. Giuliano
Anna R. Giuliano

1 January 2014 in American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SVSusan Vadaparampil
Susan Vadaparampil
TMTeri Malo
Teri Malo
JKJessica A. Kahn
Jessica A. Kahn
DSDaniel A. Salmon
Daniel A. Salmon
JLJi-Hyun Lee
Ji-Hyun Lee
AGAnna R. Giuliano
Anna R. Giuliano