Enhancing quality of trainee-written consultation notes.

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. Validation of Quality Assessment Measures for Inpatient Gastroenterology Consults on Oncologic Patients in Non-teaching Services at a Cancer Center: A Cross-Sectional Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024
   Article
2. eConsult Specialist Quality of Response (eSQUARE): A novel tool to measure specialist correspondence via electronic consultation.Journal of telemedicine and telecare · 2022
   Article
3. A cohort study of a general surgery electronic consultation system: safety implications and impact on surgical yield.BMC health services research · 2017
   Article
4. A brief, low-cost intervention improves the quality of ambulatory gastroenterology consultation notes.The American journal of medicine · 2013
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as