ReviewBioMed research international2018
Review in BioMed research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neighbourhood Social Determinants of Health and Geographical Inequalities in Premature Mortality in Taiwan: A Spatiotemporal Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Investigating the Geographic Disparities of Amenable Mortality and Related Ambulance Services in Hungary.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- [Avoidable childhood deaths: an analysis by department and municipality in Colombia (2000-2018)Mortalidade infantil por causas evitáveis: uma análise por departamento e município na Colômbia (2000-2018)].Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2021Article
- Investigating improvements in premature death in two rural, majority-minority counties in the south.SSM - population health · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmenable mortality, or premature deaths that could be prevented with medical care, is a proven indicator for assessing healthcare quality when adapted to a country or region's specific healthcare context. This concept is currently used to evaluate the performance of national and international healthcare systems. However, the levels of efficacy and effectiveness determined using this indicator can vary greatly depending on the causes of death that are included. We introduce a new approach by identifying a subgroup of causes for which there are available treatments with a high level of efficacy. These causes should be considered sentinel events to help identify limitations in the effectiveness and quality of health provision.
methodsWe conducted an extensive literature review using a list of amenable causes of death compiled by Spanish researchers. We complemented this approach by assessing the time trends of amenable mortality in two high-income countries that have a similar quality of healthcare but very different systems of provision, namely, Spain and the United States. This enabled us to identify different levels of efficacy of medical interventions (high, medium, and low). We consulted a group of medical experts and combined this information to help make the final classification of
results
conclusions
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.