Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31129592›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Statistical tools used for analyses of frequent users of emergency department: a scoping review.

Yohann Chiu, François Racine-Hemmings, Isabelle Dufour, Alain Vanasse, Maud-Christine Chouinard, Mathieu Bisson, Catherine Hudon

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

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

7 authors.

Yohann ChiuDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7872-9457
François Racine-HemmingsDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Isabelle DufourDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Alain VanasseDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Maud-Christine ChouinardDepartment of Health Sciences, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, Chicoutimi, Quebec, Canada.
Mathieu BissonDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.
Catherine HudonDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFrequent users represent a small proportion of emergency department users, but they account for a disproportionately large number of visits. Their use of emergency departments is often considered suboptimal. It would be more efficient to identify and treat those patients earlier in their health problem trajectory. It is therefore essential to describe their characteristics and to predict their emergency department use. In order to do so, adequate statistical tools are needed. The objective of this study was to determine the statistical tools used in identifying variables associated with frequent use or predicting the risk of becoming a frequent user.

methodsWe performed a scoping review following an established 5-stage methodological framework. We searched PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL databases in February 2019 using search strategies defined with the help of an information specialist. Out of 4534 potential abstracts, we selected 114 articles based on defined criteria and presented in a content analysis.

resultsWe identified four classes of statistical tools. Regression models were found to be the most common practice, followed by hypothesis testing. The logistic regression was found to be the most used statistical tool, followed by χ2 test and t-test of associations between variables. Other tools were marginally used.

conclusionsThis scoping review lists common statistical tools used for analysing frequent users in emergency departments. It highlights the fact that some are well established while others are much less so. More research is needed to apply appropriate techniques to health data or to diversify statistical point of views.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CareFrequent usersStatistical methods

Identifiers

PMID31129592
PMCPMC6537981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.