Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25185681›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2014

Determinants of health check attendance in adults: findings from the cross-sectional German Health Update (GEDA) study.

Jens Hoebel, Anne Starker, Susanne Jordan, Matthias Richter, Thomas Lampert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Targeted case finding in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016 · on this map
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Self-reported height and weight: timeliness and source of the participant information.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jens HoebelDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring, Robert Koch Institute, General-Pape-Straße 62-66, 12101 Berlin, Germany. j.hoebel@rki.de.
Anne Starker
Susanne Jordan
Matthias Richter
Thomas Lampert

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Germany, adult health checks are carried out in the primary care setting for early detection of chronic conditions, such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and kidney disease. This study aims to examine the social, behavioural, and health-related determinants of health check attendance among eligible adults in Germany.

methodsData were derived from the cross-sectional German Health Update (GEDA) study, a national health survey among adults in Germany carried out by the Robert Koch Institute. Analyses were restricted to respondents with statutory health insurance aged 35 years or older (n = 26,555). Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate associations between health check attendance and factors selected on the basis of Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use.

resultsAfter mutual adjustment, higher health check attendance was associated with a higher age, higher socioeconomic status, being married, stronger social support, physical activity, non-smoking, greater fruit and vegetable consumption, and higher use of outpatient care in both sexes. In women, higher attendance was related to alcohol consumption and having company health insurance (BKK) after multiple adjustment. In men, higher attendance was associated with better self-rated health after adjusting for all other factors.

conclusionsThe findings of this study suggest that people with an unfavourable risk factor profile, such as socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, smokers, physically inactive people, and persons with a low fruit and vegetable intake, are less likely to have health checks than those with a more favourable risk profile. Health checks carried out in the primary care setting should be evaluated for their effects on population health and health inequality.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorHealth StatusAdultAgedAge DistributionAge FactorsCross-Sectional StudiesDietExerciseFemaleGermanyHealth Status DisparitiesHealth SurveysHumansMaleMarital Status

Identifiers

PMID25185681
PMCPMC4167266

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.