Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30447691›Full record

Observational studyBMC family practice2018

Recording of weight in electronic health records: an observational study in general practice.

Lisa D M Verberne, Markus M J Nielen, Chantal J Leemrijse, Robert A Verheij, Roland D Friele

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lisa D M VerberneNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands. l.verberne@nivel.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-8860-0275
Markus M J NielenNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Chantal J LeemrijseNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Robert A VerheijNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Roland D FrieleNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), P.O. Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLTilburg University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoutine weight recording in electronic health records (EHRs) could assist general practitioners (GPs) in the identification, prevention, and management of overweight patients. However, the extent to which weight management is embedded in general practice in the Netherlands has not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency of weight recording in general practice in the Netherlands for patients who self-reported as being overweight. The specific objectives of this study were to assess whether weight recording varied according to patient characteristics, and to determine the frequency of weight recording over time for patients with and without a chronic condition related to being overweight.

methodsBaseline data from the Occupational and Environmental Health Cohort Study (2012) were combined with data from EHRs of general practices (2012-2015). Data concerned 3446 self-reported overweight patients who visited their GP in 2012, and 1516 patients who visited their GP every year between 2012 and 2015. Logistic multilevel regression analyses were performed to identify associations between patient characteristics and weight recording.

resultsIn 2012, weight was recorded in the EHRs of a quarter of patients who self-reported as being overweight. Greater age, lower education level, higher self-reported body mass index, and the presence of diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and/or cardiovascular disorders were associated with higher rates of weight recording. The strongest association was found for diabetes mellitus (adjusted OR = 10.3; 95% CI [7.3, 14.5]). Between 2012 and 2015, 90% of patients with diabetes mellitus had at least one weight measurement recorded in their EHR. In the group of patients without a chronic condition related to being overweight, this percentage was 33%.

conclusionsWeight was frequently recorded for overweight patients with a chronic condition, for whom regular weight measurement is recommended in clinical guidelines, and for which weight recording is a performance indicator as part of the payment system. For younger patients and those without a chronic condition related to being overweight, weight was less frequently recorded. For these patients, routine recording of weight in EHRs deserves more attention, with the aim to support early recognition and treatment of overweight.

Indexed as

Body Mass IndexAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesElectronic Health RecordsFamily PracticeGeneral PractitionersHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedNetherlandsOverweightRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesBody weights and measuresElectronic health recordsObesityOverweightPrimary health care

Identifiers

PMID30447691
PMCPMC6240309
OpenAlexW2900573576

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.