Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27446634›Full record

ArticleScientifica2016

The Importance of Risk and Subgroup Analysis of Nonparticipants in a Geriatric Intervention Study.

Elizabeth Rosted, Ingrid Poulsen, Carsten Hendriksen, Lis Wagner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientifica, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Elizabeth RostedCopenhagen University Hospital, Amager-Hvidovre, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1186-650X
Ingrid PoulsenRUBRIC, Clinic of Neurorehabilitation, TBI Unit, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Carsten HendriksenInstitute of Public Health, University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, 2400 Copenhagen NV, Denmark.
Lis WagnerResearch Unit of Nursing, Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-0205-4788

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background. A major concern in intervention studies is the generalizability of the findings due to refusal of intended participants to actually take part. In studies including ill older people the number of those declining to participate may be large and the concern is therefore relevant. Objectives. To compare patients characteristics, rates of acute readmission, and mortality after one and six months among older persons who agreed and those who declined to participate in a randomized controlled trial and to describe subgroups of nonparticipants. Design. Comparative study based on a randomized controlled trial. Setting. University hospital in the Capital Region of Denmark. Participants. Patients ≥70 years discharged home after a short Emergency Department stay. 399 were requested to participate; 271 consented, whereas 128 refused. Results. Refusers were more likely to be readmitted (p < 0.001) or die (p = 0.006). The largest subgroup of refusers described as "too ill" had the highest risk of readmission (OR = 3.00, 95% CI = 1.61-5.47, p = 0.001) and of mortality within six months (OR = 3.50, 95% CI = 1.64-7.49, p = 0.002). However, this seems not to have affected the results of our randomized study. Conclusion. We recommend that intervention studies among older people or other fragile patient groups include analysis of relevant risk and subgroup analyses of refusers.

Identifiers

PMID27446634
PMCPMC4944059

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.