ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2019
[Evidence-based recommendations for the revision of the Austrian periodic health examination].
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of undetected chronic kidney disease in high-risk middle-aged patients in primary care: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Willingness to Receive Periodic Health Examination Based on the Health Belief Model Among the Elderly in Rural China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- A vitamin-biomarker risk score for 90-day functional outcome after acute ischemic stroke: development and internal validation in a retrospective cohort.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The Austrian periodic health examination (PHE) was introduced in 1974 as a health insurance benefit and was redesigned for the last time in 2005. Therefore, the aim of this work was to revise the scientific basis of the PHE using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. We updated the scientific evidence of examinations and consultations that are currently part of the PHE and searched and integrated new examinations. We assessed the expectations of the population towards the PHE in three focus groups. A panel of experts developed evidence-based recommendations for the revised PHE. They formulated 26 recommendations on 20 target diseases or risk factors. In comparison to the previous PHE, the panel added screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm, osteoporotic fracture risk, and chronic kidney disease to the recommendations, while screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria, screening for iron deficiency/pernicious anaemia, and risk identification of glaucoma should no longer be included.
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.