ArticleThe European journal of general practice2017
Patients with psychological ICPC codes in primary care; a case-control study investigating the decade before presenting with problems.
Article in The European journal of general practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychological Nursing Effect of Patients with Gynecological Malignant Tumor.BioMed research international · 2022Trial
- The impacts of neighbourhood violence on mental health consultations among residents of low-income neighbourhoods in Rio de Janeiro: a retrospective cohort analysis.International journal of mental health systems · 2026Article
- Racial inequalities in mental healthcare use and mortality: a cross-sectional analysis of 1.2 million low-income individuals in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 2010-2016.BMJ global health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecognizing patients with psychological problems can be difficult for general practitioners (GPs). Use of information collected in electronic medical records (EMR) could facilitate recognition.
objectivesTo assess relevant EMR parameters in the decade before patients present with psychological problems.
methodsExploratory case-control study assessing EMR parameters of 58 228 patients recorded between 2013 and 2015 by 54 GPs. We compared EMR parameters recorded before 2014 of patients who presented with psychological problems in 2014 with those who did not.
resultsIn 2014, 2406 patients presented with psychological problems. Logistic regression analyses indicated that having registrations of the following statistically significant parameters increased the chances of presenting with psychological problems in 2014: prior administration of a depression severity questionnaire (odds ratio (OR): 3.3); fatigue/sleeping (OR: 1.6), neurological (OR: 1.5), rheumatic (OR: 1.5) and substance abuse problems (OR: 1.5); prescriptions of opioids (OR: 1.3), antimigraine preparations (OR: 1.5), antipsychotics (OR: 1.7), anxiolytics (OR: 1.4), hypnotics and sedatives (OR: 1.4), antidepressants (OR: 1.7), and antidementia drugs (OR: 2.1); treatment with minimal interventions (OR: 2.2) and physical exercise (OR: 3.3), referrals to psychology (OR: 1.5), psychiatry (OR: 1.6), and psychosocial care (OR: 2.1); double consultations (OR: 1.2), telephone consultations (OR: 1.1), and home visits (OR: 1.1).
conclusionThis study demonstrates that possible indications of psychological problems can be identified in EMR. Many EMR parameters of patients presenting with psychological problems were different compared with patients who did not.
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.