Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16437458›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Effects of interventions aimed at changing the length of primary care physicians' consultation.

A D Wilson, S Childs

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. General practice management of COPD patients following acute exacerbations: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    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

2 authors.

A D WilsonUniversity of Leicester, Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, Leicester, Leicestershire, UK, LE5 4PW. aw7@leicester.ac.uk
S Childs

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObservational studies have shown differences in process and outcome between the consultations of primary care physicians whose average consultation lengths differ. These differences may be due to self selection.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and efficiency of interventions to alter the length of primary care physicians' consultations. SEARCH STRATEGY: The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) Specialised Register (October 2002); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library June 2003); MEDLINE (1966 to October 2002);EMBASE (1981 to October 2002); NHS National Research Register (June 2003). The search strategies combined subject terms for 'general practice', 'consultation' and 'length' with methodological filters. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of interventions to alter the length of primary care physicians' consultations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted independently by two authors using agreed criteria. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Where data were missing attempts were made to contact authors. Given the heterogeneity of studies meta-analysis was not attempted, and results are presented as a narrative summary. MAIN

resultsSix articles describing four UK trials met the inclusion criteria. All tested short term changes in the consultation time allocated to each patient and all had methodological weaknesses, particularly due to non-random allocation of patients. Altering appointment length resulted in modest changes in average length of consultation. There were no consistent differences in problem recognition, examination, prescribing, referral or investigation rates. There was some evidence that blood pressure was checked and smoking discussed more often when more time was available. None of the interventions were associated with differences in patient satisfaction. No trials examined efficiency. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe findings of this review do not provide sufficient evidence to support or resist a policy of altering the lengths of primary care physicians' consultations. Further trials are needed that focus on health outcomes and cost effectiveness.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesOffice VisitsFamily PracticeHealth PromotionHumansPatient SatisfactionPractice Patterns, Physicians'Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime Factors

Identifiers

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.