SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011
Computer-assisted versus oral-and-written family history taking for identifying people with elevated risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation and significance of a digital assistant for patient history-taking and physical examination in telemedicine.Oxford open digital health · 2024Article
- The prevalence of uncontrolled diabetes mellitus in patients with type 2 diabetes: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2023Article
- Increasing the HIV testing among MSM through HIV test result exchange mechanism: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- The Computer Will See You Now: Overcoming Barriers to Adoption of Computer-Assisted History Taking (CAHT) in Primary Care.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Improving the Primary Care Consultation for Diabetes and Depression Through Digital Medical Interview Assistant Systems: Narrative Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Review
- Constructing data-derived family histories using electronic health records from a single healthcare delivery system.European journal of public health · 2020Article
- Development of an Algorithm for Determining of Genetic Risk at the Primary Healthcare Level - A New Tool for Primary Prevention: A Study Protocol.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2020Article
- Overthrowing barriers to empathy in healthcare: empathy in the age of the Internet.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes is a chronic illness characterised by insulin resistance or deficiency, resulting in elevated glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels. Because diabetes tends to run in families, the collection of data is an important tool for identifying people with elevated risk of type2 diabetes. Traditionally, oral-and-written data collection methods are employed but computer-assisted history taking systems (CAHTS) are increasingly used. Although CAHTS were first described in the 1960s, there remains uncertainty about the impact of these methods on family history taking, clinical care and patient outcomes such as health-related quality of life.
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of computer-assisted versus oral-and-written family history taking for identifying people with elevated risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus. SEARCH
methodsWe searched The Cochrane Library (issue 6, 2011), MEDLINE (January 1985 to June 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2011) and CINAHL (January 1981 to June 2011). Reference lists of obtained articles were also pursued further and no limits were imposed on languages and publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of computer-assisted versus oral-and-written history taking in adult participants (16 years and older). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently scanned the title and abstract of retrieved articles. Potentially relevant articles were investigated as full text. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were abstracted for relevant population and intervention characteristics with any disagreements resolved by discussion, or by a third party. Risk of bias was similarly assessed independently. MAIN
resultsWe found no controlled trials on computer-assisted versus oral-and-written family history taking for identifying people with elevated risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is a need to develop an evidence base to support the effective development and use of computer-assisted history taking systems in this area of practice. In the absence of evidence on effectiveness, the implementation of computer-assisted family history taking for identifying people with elevated risk of type 2 diabetes may only rely on the clinicians' tacit knowledge, published monographs and viewpoint articles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.