Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31027482›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2019

Challenges and strategies for general practitioners diagnosing serious infections in older adults: a UK qualitative interview study.

Sara McKelvie, Abigail Moore, Caroline Croxson, Daniel S Lasserson, Gail N Hayward

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Infection in older adults: a qualitative study of patient experience.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    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.

Sara McKelvieNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Abigail MooreNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK. abigail.moore@phc.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9546-2942
Caroline CroxsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Daniel S LassersonInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Gail N HaywardNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
University of Oxford · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSerious infections in older people are associated with unplanned hospital admissions and high mortality. Recognising the presence of a serious infection and making an accurate diagnosis are important challenges for General Practice. This study aimed to explore the issues UK GPs face when diagnosing serious infections in older patients.

methodsQualitative study using semi-structured interviews. 28 GPs from 27 practices were purposively sampled from across the UK to achieve maximum variation in terms of GP role, experience and practice population. Interviews began by asking participants to describe recent or memorable cases where they had assessed older patients with suspected serious infections. Additional questions from the topic guide were used to explore the challenges further. Interview transcripts were coded and analysed using a modified framework approach.

resultsDiagnosing serious infection in older adults was perceived to be challenging by participating GPs and the diagnosis was often uncertain. Contributing factors included patient complexity, atypical presentations, as well as a lack of knowledge of patients due to a loss in continuity. Diagnostic challenges were present at each stage of the patient assessment. Scoring systems were mainly used as communication tools. Investigations were sometimes used to resolve diagnostic uncertainty, but availability and speed of result limited their practical use. Clear safety-net plans shared with patients and their families helped GPs manage ongoing uncertainty.

conclusionsDiagnostic challenges are present throughout the assessment of an older adult with a serious infection in primary care. Supporting GPs to provide continuity of care may improve the recognition and developing point of care testing for use in community settings may reduce diagnostic uncertainty.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceClinical Decision-MakingGeneral PractitionersAgedAntimicrobial StewardshipFemaleHospitalizationHumansInfectionsMalePractice Patterns, Physicians'PrognosisQualitative ResearchSeverity of Illness IndexUnited KingdomClinical decision-makingGeneral practitionersGeriatricInfectionOlder peoplePrimary health careQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID31027482
PMCPMC6486693
OpenAlexW2939441074

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.