Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25991458›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2015

Why do patients with 'primary care sensitive' problems access ambulance services? A systematic mapping review of the literature.

Matthew J Booker, Ali R G Shaw, Sarah Purdy

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Why Do People Choose Emergency and Urgent Care Services? A Rapid Review Utilizing a Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Synthesis.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A patient-safety and professional perspective on non-conveyance in ambulance care: a systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. An analysis of ambulance re-contacts after non-conveyance: a retrospective cohort study in the Netherlands.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Emergency call utilization over a 10-years period: an observational study in Region Zealand, Denmark, 2013-2022.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024
    Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 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

3 authors.

Matthew J BookerCentre for Academic Primary Care, School of Social and Community Medicine University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Ali R G ShawCentre for Academic Primary Care, School of Social and Community Medicine University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Sarah PurdyCentre for Academic Primary Care, School of Social and Community Medicine University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2013-06-032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEmergency ambulance use for problems that could be managed in primary care continues to rise owing to complex reasons that are poorly understood. The objective of this systematic review is to draw together published evidence across a variety of study methodologies and settings to gain a better understanding of why patients seek help from ambulance services for these problems.

designSystematic searches were undertaken across the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Health Management Information Consortium and Health Management Information Service publication databases. Google Scholar, Web of Science, OpenSigle, EThOS and DART databases were also systematically searched for reports, proceedings, book chapters and theses, along with hand-searching of grey literature sources. Studies were included if they reported on findings examining patient, carer, health professional or service management interactions with ambulance services for primary care problems. All study methodologies and perspectives were of interest. Data were extracted, quality assessed and systematically mapped according to key findings through generation of an iterative framework.

resultsA total of 31 studies met inclusion criteria. Findings were summarised across 5 broad categories: factors associated with individual patients; actions of care-givers and bystanders; population-level factors; health infrastructure factors; challenges faced by health professionals. A number of subcategories were developed to explore these factors in more detail.

conclusionsThis review reports important factors that may impact on ambulance use for primary care problems across a global setting, including demographic measures associated with deprivation, minority status and individual social circumstances. Categorising ambulance calls for primary care problems as 'inappropriate' is context dependant and may be unhelpful. Potential implications for triage and risk management strategies are discussed.

Indexed as

AmbulancesHealth Services MisuseAnxietyDecision MakingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansAmbulancesEmergency Medical ServicesPrimary Health CareUrgent Care

Identifiers

PMID25991458
PMCPMC4442240

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.