ArticleJournal of hospital medicine2014
Patient, hospital, and geographic disparities associated with comanagement during hospitalization for colorectal cancer surgery.
Article in Journal of hospital medicine, 2014. 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.
- Internal medicine consultation for high-risk surgical patients: reflection on hospital mortality and readmission rates in a low-income country.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
- Physician Perceptions of Patient Health: A Comparative Analysis between Urologist and Hospitalist Perceptions of Need for Inpatient Hospitalist Comanagement Following Radical Cystectomy.Current urology · 2017Article
- Oncologists' perspectives on post-cancer treatment communication and care coordination with primary care physicians.European journal of cancer care · 2017Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComanagement of surgical patients has increased, but information regarding detailed characteristics of patients receiving comanagement during hospitalization for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery is lacking.
objectiveTo examine the use of and characteristics associated with comanagement of patients hospitalized for CRC surgery.
designThis study used a population-based cross-sectional design.
settingWe used the linked 2000 to 2005 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Medicare claims data. PATIENTS: We included 37,065 patients aged 66 years or older, hospitalized for definitive CRC surgery following stage I to III diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome of interest was comanagement during hospitalization for CRC surgery, and we examined the association between several patient and hospital characteristics. Comanagement was defined as having a relevant physician (ie, internal medicine hospitalist/generalist) submit a claim for evaluation and management services on 70% or more of the days of hospitalization of the patient.
resultsDuring hospitalization for CRC surgery, 27.6% of patients were comanaged, but this percentage varied widely across hospitals (from 1.9% to 83.2%). Several patient and hospital characteristics were associated with the use of comanaged care, of which important characteristics included older age at diagnosis, presence of comorbidity, emergency surgery, and hospital volume.
conclusionsExtensive variability existed in comanagement use across patients and hospitals, likely reflecting the lack of evidence for its clinical effectiveness.
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.