ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2017
Comparison of Two Sources of Clinical Audit Data to Assess the Delivery of Diabetes Care in Aboriginal Communities.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can routinely collected primary healthcare data be used to assess Aboriginal children's health and wellbeing longitudinally? A retrospective analysis of electronic medical records from an Aboriginal community-controlled health service in Central Australia.International journal of population data science · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the concordance between data extracted from two Clinical Decision Support Systems regarding diabetes testing and monitoring at Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services in Australia. De-identified PenCAT and Communicare Systems data were extracted from the services allocated to the intervention arm of a diabetes care trial, and intra-class correlations for each extracted item were derived at a service level. Strong to very strong correlations between the two data sources were found regarding the total number of patients with diabetes per service (Intra-class correlation [ICC] = 0.99), as well as the number (ICC = 0.98-0.99) and proportion (ICC = 0.96) of patients with diabetes by gender. The correlation was moderate for the number and proportion of Type 2 diabetes patients per service in the group aged 18-34 years (ICC = 0.65 and 0.8-0.82 respectively). Strong to very strong correlations were found for numbers and proportions of patients being tested for diabetes, and for appropriate monitoring of patients known to have diabetes (ICC = 0.998-1.00). This indicated a generally high degree of concordance between whole-service data extracted by the two Clinical Decision Support Systems. Therefore, the less expensive or less complex option (depending on the individual circumstances of the service) may be appropriate for monitoring diabetes testing and care. However, the extraction of data about subgroups of patients may not be interchangeable.
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.