ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2016
[Electronic Medical Record for Prenatal Care of Diabetic Women].
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo present and validate a multifunctional electronic medical record (EMR) for outpatient care to women with endocrine disorders in pregnancy and to compare health information data fill rate to conventional medical records.
methodsWe developed an EMR named Ambulatory of Endocrine Diseases in Pregnancy (AMBEG) for systematic registration of health information The AMBEG was used for obstetric and endocrine care in a sample of pregnant women admitted to the maternity reference in high-risk pregnancies in Bahia from January 2010 to December 2013. We randomly selected 100 patients accompanied with AMBEG and 100 patients monitored with conventional consultation and compared the health information data fill rate of the electronic consultation to that performed using conventional medical records.
results1461 consultations were held, of which 253, 963 and 245 were first, follow-up and puerperium consultations, respectively. Most patients were pregnant women with diabetes (77.2%) and 60.1% were women with pre-gestational diabetes. The AMBEG satisfactorily replaced the conventional medical record. The percentage of registered information was significantly higher in the AMBEG: clinical symptoms (87% versus 100, p < 0.01), uterine height (89 versus 75%, p = 0.01), total weight gain (91 versus 40%, p < 0.01) and specific diabetes data (diet, insulin regimen, glycemic control and management of hypoglycemia) revealed a significant difference (p < 0.01). The ability to export data to worksheets greatly facilitated and accelerated the statistical analysis of the data.
conclusionsAMBEG is a useful tool in clinical care for women with endocrine diseases during pregnancy. The fill rate of clinical information was superior to that registered in conventional medical records.
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.