ArticleIrish journal of medical science2016
Clinical and economic benefit of general practitioner integration to a symptomatic breast service.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dedicated general practitioner education sessions can improve diagnostic capabilities and may have a positive effect on referral patterns for common skin lesions.Irish journal of medical science · 2018Article
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
backgroundIntegration of general practitioners (GPs) into a tertiary care team is a model used internationally to assist with provision of patient care. Symptomatic breast clinics have seen significant increases in attendances and consequential staffing issues. We wished to analyze the integration of GPs into a tertiary breast care team and establish whether their inclusion is a cost-effective approach.
methodsA prospectively maintained database was used to identify 1614 new and 1453 review patients seen in the clinic between September and December 2013. The triple assessment clinical, radiological, and biopsy scores of patients assessed by GPs were compared to those assessed by registrars and to the overall number of patients seen. A cost analysis was performed based on the hourly rates of GPs and registrars.
results1614 new patients seen over the 4-month period. GPs reviewed a mean of 153.6 new patients and registrars reviewed a mean of 97.8. Registrars reviewed patients who were allocated higher 'S' scores, with 46 % of patients allocated an S4 and 21 % of patients allocated an S5 score. GPs reviewed a mean of 115.6 return patients and registrars reviewed a mean of 110.1 return patients. The weekly cost of employing 3 GPs for 15 h was €835. This compares favorably to the cost of employing a full-time registrar.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that GPs can play a substantial role in the provision of a symptomatic breast service. In addition, the incorporation of GPs in this setting can prove cost-effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26597951What 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.