ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2016
[Choosing wisely--against overuse in healthcare systems--activities in Germany and Austria in geriatric medicine].
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Moderating Effect of Coping Strategies on the Association Between the Infodemic-Driven Overuse of Health Care Services and Cyberchondria and Anxiety: Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Latent Hypothyroidism in Adults.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2012, the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Foundation initiated the Choosing Wisely campaign to promote discussion between physicians and patients (or proxies) on decision-making in medicine, and to reduce the use of procedures and therapies which are not necessary, or harmful to patients. The American Geriatrics Society (AGS), the American Medical Directors Association and the Society of Post-Acute and Long-Term Medicine (AMDA) participated in this initiative and both published 10 recommendations on procedures that should be discussed and avoided. Furthermore, some scientific societies have also published recommendations concerning elderly patients. As the campaign attracted considerable international attention, an International Roundtable was established in 2014. In Germany a similar initiative to address overuse and underuse was established by the German Society of Internal Medicine (DGIM) in 2015. The German Society of Geriatrics (DGG) was invited to address subjects affecting elderly patients that are of relevance to the German health care system. As a member of the Commission of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), it also participated actively in the development of a methods paper on how to prepare recommendations. The German College of General Practitioners and Family Physicians (DEGAM) has developed a new guideline on this topic and in Austria preliminary activities are already underway. A clear, transparent, structured and evidence-based approach may help avoid some of the methodological weaknesses to be found in the development of the U.S. recommendations. Whereas the U.S. campaign only addresses overuse, the German campaign will also address underuse and misuse.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26811241What 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.