ArticleJournal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology2019
Please Be Careful with Me: Discrepancies between Adolescent Expectations and Clinician Perspectives on the Management of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease.
Article in Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A scoping review of surgical care for people experiencing homelessness: prevalence, access, and disparities.Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveTo compare clinician perspectives for the treatment of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) with those of adolescent patients and parents.
designCross-sectional study.
settingUrban academic pediatric and adolescent medicine practices and school-based health clinics in a large urban community with a high prevalence of sexually transmitted infections and a national sample of adolescent-serving clinicians.
participantsFemale patients aged 12-19 years, parents raising an adolescent older than the age of 12 years in the urban community, and clinicians who serve adolescents recruited from regional and national listservs.
interventionsNone.
main outcome measuresVisual analogue scale scores on a scale of 0-10 corresponding to preferences on patient disposition in 17 clinical scenarios for a hypothetical patient with PID.
resultsCompared with adolescents, clinicians were significantly more likely to endorse hospitalizations when patients presented with severe or complicated illness (β = 0.9; standard error [SE], 0.22; P < .001), possible surgical emergency (β = 0.83; SE, 0.2; P < .001), concurrent pregnancy (β = 0.59; SE, 0.3; P = .046), or failure of outpatient treatment (β = 0.58; SE, 0.29; P = .045). Compared with clinicians, adolescents were significantly more likely to endorse hospitalizations when patients presented at a young age (β = 1.36; SE, 0.38; P < .001), were homeless (β = 0.88; SE, 0.32; P = .007), were afraid to inform a partner (β = 1.66; SE, 0.40; P < .001), or had unaware parents (β = 2.86; SE, 0.39; P < .001).
conclusionClinicians were more likely to recommend hospitalization when doing so adhered to national guidelines on PID treatment. Adolescents opted for hospitalization more often than clinicians in scenarios in which patients exhibited social vulnerability. Clinicians should engage with adolescents in shared disposition planning and use a more nuanced approach to PID management for adolescents who might not be able to tolerate an outpatient regimen.
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.