Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26424724›Full record

ArticleFamily practice2015

GPs' adherence to guidelines for structured assessments of stroke survivors in the community and care homes.

Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley, Anne-Marie Boylan, Constantinos Koshiaris, Maria Vazquez Montes, Gary A Ford, Daniel S Lasserson

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Daniela C Gonçalves-BradleyNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, New Radcliffe House, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6GG.
Anne-Marie BoylanNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, New Radcliffe House, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6GG.
Constantinos KoshiarisNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, New Radcliffe House, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6GG.
Maria Vazquez MontesNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, New Radcliffe House, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6GG.
Gary A FordMedical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Level 3, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU and.
Daniel S LassersonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, New Radcliffe House, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6GG, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Level 3, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU and NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, The Joint Research Office, Block 60, The Churchill Hospital, Old Road, Headington OX3 7LE, UK. daniel.lasserson@phc.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical practice guidelines recommend that stroke survivors' needs be assessed at regular intervals after stroke. The extent to which GPs comply with national guidance particularly for patients in care homes who have greatest clinical complexity is unknown.

objectivesThis study aimed to establish the current clinical practice in the UK of needs assessment by GPs for stroke survivors after hospital discharge for acute stroke.

methodsCross-sectional online survey of current practice of GPs, using the national doctors.net network.

resultsThe survey was completed by 300 GPs who had on average been working for 14 years. The structured assessment of stroke survivors' needs was not offered by 31% of GPs, with no significant difference for level of provision in community or care home settings. The outputs of reviews were added to patients' notes by 89% of GPs and used to change management by 57%. Only half the GPs reported integrating the information obtained into care plans and only a quarter of GPs had a protocol for follow-up of identified needs. Analysis of free-text comments indicated that patients in some care homes may receive more regular and structured reviews.

conclusionsThis survey suggests that at least one-third of GPs provide no formal review of the needs of stroke patients and that in only a minority are identified needs addressed in a structured way. Standardization is required for what is included in reviews and how needs are being identified and met.

Indexed as

General PractitionersGuideline AdherenceNeeds AssessmentAttitude of Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIndependent LivingInternetNursing HomesPractice Guidelines as TopicPrimary Health CareStrokeSurveys and QuestionnairesSurvivorsUnited KingdomGeneral practitionersnursing homesprimary health carestroke.

Identifiers

PMID26424724
PMCPMC5926456

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.