Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10398636›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1999

Explaining variation in hospital admission rates between general practices: cross sectional study.

F D Reid, D G Cook, A Majeed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

F D ReidDepartment of Public Health Sciences, St George's Hospital Medical School, London SW17 0RE.
D G Cook
A Majeed

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo quantify the extent of the variation in hospital admission rates between general practices, and to investigate whether this variation can be explained by factors relating to the patient, the hospital, and the general practice.

designCross sectional analysis of routine data.

settingMerton, Sutton, and Wandsworth Health Authority, which includes areas of inner and outer London. SUBJECTS: 209 136 hospital admissions in 1995-6 in patients registered with 120 general practices in the study area.

main outcome measuresHospital admission rates for general practices for overall, emergency, and elective admissions.

resultsCrude admission rates for general practices displayed a twofold difference between the 10th and the 90th centile for all, emergency, and elective admissions. This difference was only minimally reduced by standardising for age and sex. Sociodemographic patient factors derived from census data accounted for 42% of the variation in overall admission rates; 45% in emergency admission rates; and 25% in elective admission rates. There was a strong positive correlation between factors related to deprivation and emergency, but not elective, admission rates, raising questions about equity of provision of health care. The percentage of each practice's admissions to different local hospitals added significantly to the explanation of variation, while the general practice characteristics considered added very little.

conclusionsHospital admission rates varied greatly between general practices; this was largely explained by differences in patient populations. The lack of significant factors related to general practice is of little help for the direct management of admission rates, although the effect of sociological rather than organisational practice variables should be explored further. Admission rates should routinely be standardised for differences in patient populations and hospitals used.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesEmergency TreatmentFamily PracticeHumansMultivariate AnalysisPatient AdmissionPractice Patterns, Physicians'Referral and ConsultationSocioeconomic FactorsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID10398636
PMCPMC28160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.