ArticlePloS one2018
Implementation of a seven-day hospitalist program to improve the outcomes of the weekend admission: A retrospective before-after study in Taiwan.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Impact of hospitalist care model on patient outcomes in acute medical unit: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Observational
- Article
- Patient Delay in Hospital Visiting and the Weekend Effect of Surveillance Report on Hand-Foot-and-Mouth Disease and Epidemic Parotitis in Hanzhong City, China.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePatients admitted during weekends may have worse outcomes than those during weekdays. Adjusting the practice of senior physicians over weekends may reduce the weekend effect.
designA controlled before-after study, with propensity score matching (PSM) for potential confounding variables, to compare outcomes between weekday and weekend admissions.
settingA 2000-bed medical centre in Taiwan.
participantsHospitalised general medicine patients cared for by traditional internal medicine teams (pre-intervention cohort) and those cared for by hospitalists after introducing a seven-day hospitalist program in the first six-month (post-intervention cohort) and following three-year periods.
main outcome measuresProportion of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) events, and in-hospital mortality.
resultsThe pre-intervention cohort included 982 patients. Significantly higher mortality rates (11.3% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.032) were recorded in the case of weekend admissions, with similar proportions of ICU admission and CPR events. The post-intervention cohort included 601 patients. No significant difference was recorded in any of the main outcomes between weekday and weekend admissions. PSM for pre-intervention and post-intervention cohort showed shorter LOS after intervention, with no difference in ICU admission, CPR, and morality for the weekday and weekend admissions, respectively. The three-year cohort that followed, consisting of 3315 patients, showed no difference of outcomes between weekday and weekend admissions. After PSM, there were no significant differences in ICU admission rates (1.0% vs. 1.8%), CPR (0.3% vs. 0.2%) events and hospital mortality rates (8.1% vs. 8.5%), when weekday and weekend admissions were compared.
conclusionsThe seven-day hospitalist program shows potential in providing equally safe care for both weekday and weekend general medicine admissions with sustainable development.
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.