Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25628386›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology practice2015

Impact of observation status on hospital use for patients with cancer.

Allison Lipitz-Snyderman, Adam Klotz, Coral L Atoria, Steven Martin, Jeffrey Groeger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Impact of an oncology urgent care center on preventable emergency department visits: revisiting lessons from a global pandemic to improve quality of care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Observation unit use among patients with cancer following emergency department visits: Results of a multicenter prospective cohort from CONCERN.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2022
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A Population-Based Assessment of Emergency Department Observation Status for Older Adults With Cancer.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Allison Lipitz-SnydermanMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York NY snyderma@mskcc.org.
Adam KlotzMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York NY.
Coral L AtoriaMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York NY.
Steven MartinMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York NY.
Jeffrey GroegerMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York NY.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Elisa de Stanchina · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA 008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFor patients with cancer, the impact of observation status on hospital and patient outcomes is not well understood. Our objective was to assess the impact that an observation unit had on hospital use for patients with cancer who presented to the Urgent Care Center at a comprehensive cancer center.

methodsWe assessed the proportion of Urgent Care Center visits that resulted in an admission to the hospital at a comprehensive cancer center, before (July 9, 2012-December 31, 2012) versus after (July 9, 2013-December 31, 2013) implementation of the observation unit. We also assessed differences in length of stay and stratified the data by presenting complaint.

resultsDuring each 6-month study interval, there were more than 10,000 patient visits to the Urgent Care Center, representing approximately 6,000 unique patients. Fewer visits resulted in an inpatient admission postimplementation (47%) compared with preimplementation (50%). The duration of hospital stay for admitted patients was higher in the post period (median 108 hours) than in the pre period (median 96 hours). Alternatively, the proportion of hospital admissions with a length of stay less than 24 hours was lower in the post period (pre: 7%; post: 5%). Lower admission rates postimplementation were observed for patients who presented with fluid and electrolyte disorders, nausea and vomiting, syncope, and chest pain.

conclusionWe observed reductions in hospital use for patients with cancer related to an observation unit in a comprehensive cancer center. Adoption of this approach for this patient population has the potential to reduce hospital use, which is of interest to hospitals, payers, and patients.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsCancer Care FacilitiesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID25628386
PMCPMC4371119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.