ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2008
Enhancing continuity of information: essential components of a referral document.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Enhancing continuity of information: essential components of consultation reports.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2009Pooled it
- Rationale and model for integrating the pharmacist into the outpatient referral-consultation process.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- A brief, low-cost intervention improves the quality of ambulatory gastroenterology consultation notes.The American journal of medicine · 2013Article
- Quality of communication between primary health care and mental health care: an examination of referral and discharge letters.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2012Review
- Enhancing quality of trainee-written consultation notes.The American journal of medicine · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify elements of data that have been shown to contribute to continuity of information between primary care providers and medical specialists providing care to adult asthma patients.
designSystematic review of the literature followed by a 2-round modified Delphi consensus process.
settingProvince of Ontario.
participantsEight expert panelists, including 3 practising family physicians, a medical specialist knowledgeable in the treatment of asthma, a family physician previously involved in provincial initiatives related to primary care reform, an e-health technologist, a developer of evidence-based guidelines, and an operations and programs specialist.
methodWe completed a systematic literature review to develop a list of items or data elements related to patient information transfer in chronic care. We engaged an 8-member expert panel in a 2-round modified Delphi process to assess the importance of the 74 data elements identified in the literature review and to identify any additional important elements. MAIN
findingsThe expert panelists reached consensus on 24 components of information, referred to here as minimum essential elements of a referral document, needed for consultations on adult asthma patients.
conclusionThe 24 minimum essential elements of information that should be transferred during referral of asthma patients from primary care providers to experts in asthma care were generated by primary care physicians and thought essential for achieving continuity in information transfer. We assembled these elements into a suggested format for a referral document. The format can be easily modified by practitioners caring for patients with other chronic diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18854473PMC2567257What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.