Computer use must not affect doctor-patient relationship.

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.

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.

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Time to reverse that altruism bypass...The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
   Article
2. Believe me, public involvement does work--honest!The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
   Article
3. Computers and consumerism in UK general practice: learning from the Australian experience.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
   Article
4. The Aussie consultation.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
   Article
5. Practising communication skills.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
   Article
6. Myalgic encephalomyelitis--the dangers of Cartesian fundamentalism.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Has general practitioner computing made a difference to patient care? A systematic review of published reports.1995
• Comment on
  Can computerised decision support systems deliver improved quality in primary care?. Interview by Abi Berger.1999
• Comment on
  A descriptive feast but an evaluative famine: systematic review of published articles on primary care computing during 1980-97.2001

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as