ArticleThe American journal of the medical sciences2016
Systemic Sclerosis and Perceptions of Quality in Primary Care.
Article in The American journal of the medical sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rehabilitation Interventions in Systemic Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Future Directions.Arthritis care & research · 2022Pooled it
- Avoidant or Restrictive Food Intake Disorder Symptoms in Adults With Systemic Sclerosis: A Nationwide Study in Spain.Arthritis care & research · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAmong patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc), early recognition of potentially life-threatening organ involvement is critical. Because prompt recognition of early signs of organ involvement can dramatically alter a patient׳s outcome, it is crucial that patients and primary care providers (PCPs) recognize these symptoms. We conducted a survey of patients with SSc regarding their perceptions of the quality of their primary care, and whether or not they perceive the quality of their primary care to be impaired by their scleroderma diagnosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsA mail survey was sent to 525 patients with SSc seen at the Medical University of South Carolina. Questionnaire items addressed demographics and perceptions of their quality of their primary care.
resultsOf n = 140 respondents, most (74.5%) did not feel as though their diagnosis of SSc has resulted in barriers to appropriate or satisfactory care, and most (81.3%) answered that they had not ever felt as though their medical concerns were not being addressed because they had SSc. Perceptions of barriers were significantly (P < 0.05) associated with female sex and younger age, along with poorer overall quality of care and satisfaction with their primary care.
conclusionsMost patients with SSc value the quality of their primary care. However, some patients with SSc feel that their PCPs do not adequately monitor their blood pressure, reflux symptoms or shortness of breath. These results highlight the importance of PCPs in the overall care of patients with SSc and the need for continued education regarding close monitoring of signs and symptoms suggestive of possible life-threatening internal organ involvement.
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.