ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2015
Differences in Presentation and Management of Pediatric Facial Lacerations by Type of Health Insurance.
Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2015. 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.
- Disparities in the use of anxiolysis or sedation for facial laceration repair in the pediatric emergency department.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Demographic and socioeconomic disparities in receipt of ophthalmology consultation for facial trauma.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Updates in emergency department laceration management.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLimited data are available regarding differences in presentation and management of pediatric emergency department (PED) patients based on insurance status. The objective of the study was to assess the difference in management of pediatric facial lacerations based on medical insurance status.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study with universal sampling of patients with facial lacerations who were treated in an urban PED (45K visits/year) over a one-year period. Demographic features and injury characteristics for patients with commercial (private) insurance and those with Medicaid or Medicare (public) insurance were compared.
resultsOf 1235 children included in the study, 667 (54%) had private insurance and 485 (39%) had public insurance. The two groups did not differ in age or gender, arrival by ambulance, location of injury occurrence, mechanism of injury, part of face involved, length or depth of laceration, use of local anesthetic, or method of repair but differed in acuity assigned at triage. Patients with public insurance were found less likely to have subspecialty consultation in bivariable (OR=0.41, 95% CI [0.24-0.68]) and multivariable logistic regression analyses (OR=0.45, 95% CI [0.25-0.78]). Patients with public insurance received procedural sedation significantly less often than those with private insurance (OR=0.48, 95% CI [0.29-0.76]). This difference was not substantiated in multivariable models (OR=0.74, 95% CI [0.40-1.31]).
conclusionPatients with public insurance received less subspecialty consultation compared to privately insured patients despite a similarity in the presentation and characteristics of their facial lacerations. The reasons for these disparities require further investigation.
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.