Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20644189›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine

A method for estimating relative complexity of ambulatory care.

David A Katerndahl, Robert Wood, Carlos Roberto Jaén

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. General practice - the integrating discipline.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  6. It's about time: redesigning consultation length in general practice.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2022
    Article
  7. I am ready to see you now, Doctor! A mixed-method study of the Let's Discuss Health website implementation in Primary Care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Diagnostic protocols-A consultation tool still to be discovered.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2018
    Observational
  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

3 authors.

David A KaterndahlFamily & Community Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas 78229-3900, USA. katerndahl@uthscsa.edu
Robert Wood
Carlos Roberto Jaén

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe wanted to demonstrate a method for calculating the relative complexity of ambulatory clinical encounters.

methodsMeasures of complexity should reflect the complexity of the typical encounter and across encounters. If inputs represent the information transferred from the patient to the physician, then inputs include history, physical examination, testing, diagnoses, and patient demographics. Outputs include medications prescribed and other therapies used, including education and counseling, procedures performed, and disposition. The complexity of each input/output is defined as the mean input/output quantity per clinical encounter weighted by its inter-encounter diversity (range of possibilities used) and variability (visit-to-visit change). In complex systems, as the information in the input increases linearly, the complexity of the system increases exponentially. To assess the impact of the complexity of the encounter on the physician, we adjusted the estimated complexity by the duration-of-visit.

resultsUsing the 2000 NAMCS database, we calculated input and output complexities for 3 specialties. Construct validity was affirmed by comparing the relative rankings of complexity against relative rankings using other complexity-related measures. Although total relative complexity was similar for family medicine (44.04 +/- 0.0024 SE) and cardiology (42.78 +/- 0.0004 standard error [SE]), when adjusted for duration-of-visit, family medicine had a greater complexity density per hour (167.33 +/- 0.0095 SE) than either cardiology (125.4 +/- 0.0117 SE) or psychiatry (31.21 +/- 0.0027 SE).

conclusionsThis method estimates complexity based on the amount of care provided weighted by its diversity and variability. Such estimates could have broad use for interphysician comparisons as well as longitudinal applications.

Indexed as

Nonlinear DynamicsSystems TheoryAmbulatory CareDatabases, FactualHealth Care SurveysHumansModels, TheoreticalPrimary Health CareProcess Assessment, Health CarePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsTexasUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID20644189
PMCPMC2906529

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.