Inpatient care: should the general physician now take charge?

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Improving the quality of care for medical inpatients by placing a higher priority on ward rounds.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2013
   Article
2. Hospitalists--too much baggage to travel?Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2012
   Article
3. #ClinMed: What have social media got to do with medicine?Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2012
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Inpatient care: should the general physician now take charge?2012
• Commented on by
  US-style hospitalists are unlikely to improve delivery of patient care in the NHS.2012
• Commented on by
  In order to encourage general internal medicine (GIM) as a specialty we must learn from our peers outside the UK.2012
• Commented on by
  In patient care: should the general physician now take charge?2013
• Commented on by
  Response.2013

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as