Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29255108›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2018

Associations between diagnostic activity and measures of patient experience in primary care: a cross-sectional ecological study of English general practices.

Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Silvia C Mendonca, Carolynn Gildea, Sean McPhail, Michael D Peake, Greg Rubin, Hardeep Singh, William Hamilton, Fiona M Walter, Martin Roland and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Associations between general practice characteristics and chest X-ray rate: an observational study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Association between use of urgent suspected cancer referral and mortality and stage at diagnosis: a 5-year national cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. Article
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Georgios LyratzopoulosEpidemiology of Cancer Healthcare and Outcomes (ECHO) Research Group, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK; Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Silvia C MendoncaCambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Carolynn GildeaNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Services, Public Health England, London, UK.
Sean McPhailNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Services, Public Health England, London, UK.
Michael D PeakeNational Cancer Registration and Analysis Services, Public Health England, London, UK; Institute for Lung Health, Department of Respiratory Medicine, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Greg RubinInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, UK.
Hardeep SinghHouston Veterans Affairs Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Section of Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, US.
William HamiltonUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Fiona M WalterPrimary Care Unit.
Martin RolandCambridge Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Gary A AbelUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Public Health England · GBUniversity of Exeter · GBNational Cancer Registration Service · GBNewcastle University · GBPrimary Health Care · QAUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 17854Cancer Research UK 18180Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLower use of endoscopies and urgent referrals for suspected cancer has been linked to poorer outcomes for patients with cancer; it is important to examine potential predictors of variable use.

aimTo examine the associations between general practice measures of patient experience and practice use of endoscopies or urgent referrals for suspected cancer. DESIGN AND

settingCross-sectional ecological analysis in English general practices.

methodData were taken from the GP Patient Survey and the Cancer Services Public Health Profiles. After adjustment for practice population characteristics, practice-level associations were examined between the use of endoscopy and urgent referrals for suspected cancer, and the ability to book an appointment (used as proxy for ease of access), the ability to see a preferred doctor (used as proxy for relational continuity), and doctor/nurse communication skills.

resultsTaking into account practice scores for the ability to book an appointment, practices rated higher for the proxy measure of relational continuity used urgent referrals and endoscopies less often (for example, 30% lower urgent referral and 15% lower gastroscopy rates between practices in the 90th/10th centiles, respectively). In contrast, practices rated higher for doctor communication skills used urgent referrals and endoscopies more often (for example, 26% higher urgent referral and 17% higher gastroscopy rates between practices in the 90th/10th centiles, respectively). Patients with cancer in practices that were rated higher for doctor communication skills were less likely to be diagnosed as emergencies (1.7% lower between practices in the 90th than in the 10th centile).

conclusionPractices where patients rated doctor communication highly were more likely to investigate and refer patients urgently but, in contrast, practices where patients could see their preferred doctor more readily were less likely to do so. This article discusses the possible implications of these findings for clinical practice.

Indexed as

General PracticeCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerEndoscopyEnglandHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNeoplasmsPatient SatisfactionPractice Patterns, Physicians'Quality Indicators, Health CareReferral and Consultationcancerdiagnosisendoscopyinvestigationsprimary carereferrals

Identifiers

PMID29255108
PMCPMC5737322
OpenAlexW2760774929

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.