ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2013
Gatekeeping and referrals to cardiologists: general practitioners' views on interactive communications.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of General Practice in Complex Health Care Systems.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- Use of pregnancy ultrasound before the 19th week scan: an analytical study based on the Icelandic Childbirth and Health Cohort.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2018Article
- Gatekeepers for infertility treatment? Views of ART providers concerning referrals by non-ART providers.Reproductive biomedicine & society online · 2018Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveReferrals to specialists have not been compulsory in Iceland since 1984. In 2006, referrals were again required for patients to receive reimbursement for part of the cost of appointments with cardiologists. The aim of this study was to explore GPs' attitudes to the referral system and possible professional gain by interactive communications.
designCross-sectional questionnaire survey. SETTING, SUBJECTS, AND
main outcome measuresThis is part of a larger study in 2007 on referrals from GPs to cardiologists. A questionnaire was sent to all working GPs in Iceland (n = 201 and responsible for 307 000 inhabitants) regarding the referral process, reasons for referrals, how often a response letter was received, and GPs' attitudes to the referral system. Responses from doctors working in rural areas were compared with those working in Reykjavik and nearby urban areas.
resultsThe response rate was 63% (126 answers). The mean age of participants was 51; 89% were GP specialists and 60% worked in Reykjavik and nearby urban areas. Almost all respondents (98%) thought that report letters from cardiologists were helpful; 64% (95% confidence interval 53-73) thought that the recently introduced referral system did increase useful information that was beneficial to their patients. There was a statistically significant difference between colleagues working in rural areas and those working in Reykjavik and nearby urban areas regarding several aspects of the referral process.
conclusionA referral system increases the flow of information and mutual communications between general practitioners and specialists to the benefit of the patients. The geographical location of the health care centre may be of importance regarding the value of the referrals.
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.