Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12528590›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2002

The relationship between consultation length, process and outcomes in general practice: a systematic review.

Andrew Wilson, Susan Childs

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 130 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–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

130 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. The effect of interventions to alter the consultation length of family physicians: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

70 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrew WilsonDepartment of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester LE5 4PW. aw7@le.ac.uk
Susan Childs

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the study was to examine differences in consultation process and health outcomes between primary care physicians who consult at different rates. A systematic review of observational studies was carried out, restricted to English language journal papers reporting original research or systematic reviews. Qualitative analysis with narrative overview of methodology and key results was undertaken, using MEDLINE (1966 to 1999), EMBASE (1981 to 1999), and the NHS National Research Register. Secondary references from this search were also considered for inclusion. Main outcome measures were objectively measured process or healthcare outcomes. Thirteen papers, describing ten studies, were identified. There were consistent differences in several elements of process and outcome between general practitioners (GPs) who consult at different rates. Although average consultation length may be a marker of other doctor attributes, the evidence suggests that patients seeking help from a doctor who spends more time with them are more likely to have a consultation that includes important elements of care.

Indexed as

Outcome and Process Assessment, Health CareTime and Motion StudiesAppointments and SchedulesFamily PracticeHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID12528590
PMCPMC1314474

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.