Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20818469›Full record

ArticleThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2010

Clinical practice patterns of generalists and specialists in Alzheimer's disease: what are the differences, and what difference do they make?

L Robinson, B Vellas, S Knox, K Lins

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Who Is Providing the Predominant Care for Older Adults With Dementia?Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2016
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Identification, emotional reactions, and perceived threat to persons with Alzheimer's disease.American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias · 2012
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

L RobinsonInstitute for Health and Society, Institute for Ageing and Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. a.l.robinson@ncl.ac.uk
B Vellas
S Knox
K Lins
Eisai (United Kingdom) · GBHôpital Purpan · FRNewcastle University · GBPfizer (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimising the roles played by both generalists and specialists in the diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) could have a major impact on the quality and cost of patient care. Therefore, one aim of the IMPACT survey was to characterise the similarities and differences between these 2 categories of physicians, in 5 different European countries, across a number of domains relevant to the medical care of people at risk for AD and those with the disease. Physician respondents comprised 250 generalists and 250 specialists from 5 European countries--France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A substantial majority of generalists were either general practitioners or family physicians; the majority of specialists were neurologists. In April and May 2009, physician respondents completed a 30-minute, Web-based questionnaire during which they were presented with a number of multiple-choice-type questions concerning their knowledge of AD, approach to diagnosis and treatment of AD and experience of providing care for people with dementia. Generalists reported that 45% of their AD patients had mild symptoms at the initial visit compared with 60% for specialists (P < 0.001). Specialists claimed that they diagnose patients with AD themselves in 65% of cases versus 33% for generalists (P < 0.001). The main prescription treatment options employed were AD-specific medication (90%) and medication for mood or behaviour (78%). A similar percentage of generalists and specialists (77% and 75%) initiate drug treatment within 1 month of diagnosis. Overall, there were more similarities than differences between specialists and generalists regarding a broad spectrum of issues relating to AD; differences between countries appear to be greater than differences between physician groups.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceFamily PracticeNeurologySpecializationAlzheimer DiseaseCentral Nervous System AgentsData CollectionEuropeHumansInternetPractice Patterns, Physicians'Surveys and QuestionnairesCentral Nervous System Agents

Identifiers

PMID20818469
PMCPMC12880366
OpenAlexW2001011474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.