Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29061717›Full record

Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2017

Identifying people with a learning disability: an advanced search for general practice.

Amy M Russell, Louise Bryant, Allan House

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Scoping Review of Approaches to Improving Quality of Data Relating to Health Inequalities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Breaking the cycle of inequalities for people with a learning disability.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Learning disability registers: known unknowns and unknown unknowns.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amy M RussellLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds.
Louise BryantLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds.
Allan HouseLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds.
University of Leeds · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/102/03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople with learning disabilities (LD) have poor physical and mental health when compared with the general population. They are also likely to find it more difficult than others to describe their symptoms adequately. It is therefore harder for healthcare workers to identify the health needs of those with learning disabilities, with the danger of some problems being left unrecognised. Practice registers record only a proportion of those who are eligible, making it difficult to target improvements in their health care.

aimTo test a Read Code search supporting the identification of people with a mild-to-moderate learning disability who are not currently on the learning disability register. DESIGN AND

settingAn observational study in primary care in West Yorkshire.

methodRead Code searches were created to identify individuals with a learning disability not on the LD register; they were field tested and further refined before testing in general practice.

resultsDiagnostic codes identified small numbers of individuals who should have been on the LD register. Functional and service use codes often created large numbers of false-positive results. The specific descriptive codes 'Learning difficulties' and 'Referral to learning disability team' needed follow-up review, and then identified some individuals with LD who were not on the register.

conclusionThe Read Code search supported practices to populate their registers and was quick to run and review, making it a viable choice to support register revalidation. However, it did not find large numbers of people eligible for the LD register who were previously unidentified by their practice, suggesting that additional complementary methods are required to support practices to validate their registers.

Indexed as

General PracticeEnglandFemaleHealth Care SurveysHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansLearning DisabilitiesMaleMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedPhysician-Patient RelationsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Prevalencegeneral practicehealth checkslearning disorderspatient selectionprimary health careRead Code

Identifiers

PMID29061717
PMCPMC5697554
OpenAlexW2766315463

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.