ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2010
Nipissing District Developmental Screen: patterns of use by physicians in Ontario.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Phenotypic variability of 16p11.2 distal BP2-BP3 deletion in a transgenerational family and in neurodevelopmentally ascertained samples.Journal of medical genetics · 2023Article
- Screening school-age children for developmental language disorder in primary care.International journal of speech-language pathology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine if providing the Nipissing District Developmental Screen (NDDS) free of charge is associated with increased use of this measure and to investigate regional variations in the use of the NDDS in Ontario.
designRetrospective analysis of purchasing data from before the NDDS was available at no cost compared with analysis of the results of a brief questionnaire completed by those downloading the NDDS for free.
settingOntario.
participantsUsers of the NDDS.
interventionProvision of free on-line access to the NDDS.
main outcome measuresPatterns of purchasing or downloading of the NDDS by FPs and health care professionals (HCPs) before and after implementation of the program.
resultsBefore the program, 91 FPs (0.9% of FPs in Ontario) purchased the NDDS, and an additional 129 FPs (1.3% of FPs in Ontario) downloaded the NDDS in the year after the start of the program. Including all other HCPs increased the estimated number of users to 504 (representing an estimated 5.0% of all FPs in Ontario). Adjusting for group practice increased the estimate to 16.5% of all FPs in Ontario who had access to the NDDS. There were no significant differences in NDDS usage by FPs between central, southwestern, and northern Ontario (P > .05). Significantly fewer FPs in eastern Ontario accessed the NDDS than FPs in other areas of the province did (P < .001).
conclusionDespite measures to increase usage, only a small number of FPs access the NDDS in Ontario. However, free access to the NDDS does seem to contribute to removing barriers to screening, as indicated by a 3-fold increase in the number of FPs accessing the NDDS. Further research is required to investigate the reasons for these trends so that effective methods to increase the use of developmental screening measures in clinical practice can be implemented.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20154233PMC2821255What 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.