Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26297374›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2015

Community IntraVenous Antibiotic Study (CIVAS): protocol for an evaluation of patient preferences for and cost-effectiveness of community intravenous antibiotic services.

C Czoski Murray, M Twiddy, D Meads, S Hess, J Wright, E D Mitchell, C Hulme, S Dodd, H Gent, A Gregson and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
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

16 authors.

C Czoski MurrayLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
M TwiddyLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
D MeadsLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
S HessInstitute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
J WrightLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5239-0173
E D MitchellLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
C HulmeLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
S DoddLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
H GentService user.
A GregsonLeeds Community Healthcare Trust, Leeds, UK.
K McLintockLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
D K RaynorSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
K ReynardLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
P StanleyBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds, UK.
R VincentLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
J MintonLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 11/2003/60
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOutpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is used to treat a wide range of infections, and is common practice in countries such as the USA and Australia. In the UK, national guidelines (standards of care) for OPAT services have been developed to act as a benchmark for clinical monitoring and quality. However, the availability of OPAT services in the UK is still patchy and until quite recently was available only in specialist centres. Over time, National Health Service (NHS) Trusts have developed OPAT services in response to local needs, which has resulted in different service configurations and models of care. However, there has been no robust examination comparing the cost-effectiveness of each service type, or any systematic examination of patient preferences for services on which to base any business case decision. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will use a mixed methods approach, to evaluate patient preferences for and the cost-effectiveness of OPAT service models. The study includes seven NHS Trusts located in four counties. There are five inter-related work packages: a systematic review of the published research on the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of intravenous antibiotic delivery services; a qualitative study to explore existing OPAT services and perceived barriers to future development; an economic model to estimate the comparative value of four different community intravenous antibiotic services; a discrete choice experiment to assess patient preferences for services, and an expert panel to agree which service models may constitute the optimal service model(s) of community intravenous antibiotics delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the NRES Committee, South West-Frenchay using the Proportionate Review Service (ref 13/SW/0060). The results of the study will be disseminated at national and international conferences, and in international journals.

Indexed as

Patient PreferenceAdministration, IntravenousAmbulatory CareAnti-Bacterial AgentsAustraliaCommunity Health ServicesCost-Benefit AnalysisHome Care ServicesHome NursingHumansModels, EconomicQualitative ResearchSelf AdministrationSystematic Reviews as TopicUnited KingdomAnti-Bacterial AgentsHEALTH ECONOMICSINFECTIOUS DISEASESQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID26297374
PMCPMC4550740

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.