Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15723708›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2005

Oral vitamin B12 therapy in the primary care setting: a qualitative and quantitative study of patient perspectives.

Jeff C Kwong, David Carr, Irfan A Dhalla, Denise Tom-Kun, Ross E G Upshur

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Oral vitamin B12: a cost-effective alternative.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2014
    Article
  7. Cobalamin deficiency, hyperhomocysteinemia, and dementia.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2010
    Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jeff C KwongDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, 263 McCaul Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5T 1W7, Canada. jeff.kwong@utoronto.ca <jeff.kwong@utoronto.ca>
David Carr
Irfan A Dhalla
Denise Tom-Kun
Ross E G Upshur
University of Toronto · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAYork University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough oral replacement with high doses of vitamin B12 is both effective and safe for the treatment of B12 deficiency, little is known about patients' views concerning the acceptability and effectiveness of oral B12. We investigated patient perspectives on switching from injection to oral B12 therapy.

methodsThis study involved a quantitative arm using questionnaires and a qualitative arm using semi-structured interviews, both to assess patient views on injection and oral therapy. Patients were also offered a six-month trial of oral B12 therapy. One hundred and thirty-three patients who receive regular B12 injections were included from three family practice units (two hospital-based academic clinics and one community health centre clinic) in Toronto.

resultsSeventy-three percent (63/86) of respondents were willing to try oral B12. In a multivariate analysis, patient factors associated with a "willingness to switch" to oral B12 included being able to get to the clinic in less than 30 minutes (OR 9.3, 95% CI 2.2-40.0), and believing that frequent visits to the health care provider (OR 5.4, 95% CI 1.1-26.6) or the increased costs to the health care system (OR 16.7, 95% CI 1.5-184.2) were disadvantages of injection B12. Fifty-five patients attempted oral therapy and 52 patients returned the final questionnaire. Of those who tried oral therapy, 76% (39/51) were satisfied and 71% (39/55) wished to permanently switch. Factors associated with permanently switching to oral therapy included believing that the frequent visits to the health care provider (OR 35.4, 95% CI 2.9-432.7) and travel/parking costs (OR 8.7, 95% CI 1.2-65.3) were disadvantages of injection B12. Interview participants consistently cited convenience as an advantage of oral therapy.

conclusionSwitching patients from injection to oral B12 is both feasible and acceptable to patients. Oral B12 supplementation is well received largely due to increased convenience. Clinicians should offer oral B12 therapy to their patients who are currently receiving injections, and newly diagnosed B12-deficient patients who can tolerate and are compliant with oral medications should be offered oral supplementation.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overFamily PracticeFemaleHumansInjectionsMaleMiddle AgedOntarioPatient Acceptance of Health CarePhysician-Patient RelationsPrimary Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesVitamin B 12Vitamin B 12 DeficiencyVitamin B 12

Identifiers

PMID15723708
PMCPMC554115
OpenAlexW1502477443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.