Correction: Involvement in emergency situations by primary care doctors on-call in Norway--a prospective population-based observational study.

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. GP roles in emergency medical services: a systematic mapping review and narrative synthesis.BJGP open · 2023
   Article
2. General practitioners' and out-of-hours doctors' role as gatekeeper in emergency admissions to somatic hospitals in Norway: registry-based observational study.BMC health services research · 2019
   Observational
3. Treatment, transport, and primary care involvement when helicopter emergency medical services are inaccessible: a retrospective study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2018
   Observational

Corrections and comments

• Erratum for
  Involvement in emergency situations by primary care doctors on-call in Norway--a prospective population-based observational study.2010

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.