Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26831125›Full record

Observational studyBMC family practice2016

Compliance with referrals to medical specialist care: patient and general practice determinants: a cross-sectional study.

Christel E van Dijk, Judith D de Jong, Robert A Verheij, Tessa Jansen, Joke C Korevaar, Dinny H de Bakker

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC family practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Christel E van DijkNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O.Box 1568, , 3500 BN,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. christelvdijk@hotmail.com.
Judith D de JongNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O.Box 1568, , 3500 BN,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. j.dejong@nivel.nl.
Robert A VerheijNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O.Box 1568, , 3500 BN,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. r.verheij@nivel.nl.
Tessa JansenNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O.Box 1568, , 3500 BN,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. t.jansen@nivel.nl.
Joke C KorevaarNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O.Box 1568, , 3500 BN,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. j.korevaar@nivel.nl.
Dinny H de BakkerNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, P.O.Box 1568, , 3500 BN,, Utrecht, The Netherlands. d.debakker@nivel.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn a gatekeeper system, primary care physicians and patients jointly decide whether or not medical specialist care is needed. However, it is the patient who decides to actually use the referral. Referral non-compliance could delay diagnosis and treatment. The objective of this study was to assess patient compliance with a referral to medical specialist care and identify patient and practice characteristics that are associated with it.

methodsObservational study using data on 48,784 referrals to medical specialist care derived from electronic medical records of 58 general practices for the period 2008-2010. Referral compliance was based on claims data of medical specialist care. Logistic multilevel regression analyses were conducted to determine associations between patient and general practice characteristics and referral compliance.

resultsIn 86.6% of the referrals, patients complied. Patient and not practice characteristics were significantly associated with compliance. Patients from deprived urban areas and patients aged 18-44 years were less likely to comply, whereas patients aged 65 years and older were more likely to comply.

conclusionAbout 1 in 8 patients do not use their referral. These patients may not receive adequate care. Demographic and socio-economic factors appear to affect compliance. The results of this study may be used to make general practitioners more aware that some patients are more likely to be noncompliant with referrals.

Indexed as

Social ClassSpecializationAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLogistic ModelsMale

Identifiers

PMID26831125
PMCPMC4736608

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.