Calling time on the 10-minute consultation.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Physicians Interrupting Patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019
   Article
2. Pharmacists Becoming Physicians: For Better or Worse?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
   Article
3. Prostate cancer: active surveillance may prove organisationally impossible.Irish journal of medical science · 2015
   Article
4. Calling time on the 10-minute consultation [letter].The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Calling time on the 10-minute consultation [letter].2012
• Comment on
  Calling time on the 10-minute consultation.2012

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as