ArticleBMJ open2019
Long-term outcomes in patients newly diagnosed with iron deficiency anaemia in general practice: a retrospective cohort study.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Iron Deficiency-More Than Just Anemia: A Literature Review.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2025Review
- Complete Blood Count Alterations Prior to the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer May Help in the Detection of Synchronous Liver Metastases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Circulating insulin-like growth factor-I and risk of 25 common conditions: outcome-wide analyses in the UK Biobank study.European journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Diagnostic workup of cancer in patients with new-onset anaemia: a Danish cohort study in general practice.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Observational
- Insufficient classification of anaemia in general practice: a Danish register-based observational study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Observational
- Diagnosis and Management of Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia in Patients with Liver and Bowel Disorders.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo describe all iron deficiency anaemia (IDA)-related causes during follow-up of patients newly diagnosed with IDA and to assess whether a delayed colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis influences survival. DESIGN AND
settingRetrospective cohort study of patients from general practices in the Dordrecht area, the Netherlands.
participantsMen and women aged ≥50 years with a new diagnosis of IDA (ie, no anaemia 2 years previously).
methodFrom February 2007 to February 2018, all relevant data were collected from the files of the referral hospital. Early IDA-related cause was defined as established within 18 weeks after IDA diagnosis. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to analyse survival of patients with CRC diagnosis.
results587 patients with IDA were included with a median follow-up of 4.6 years. Early and late IDA-related causes could be established in 32% and 8% of patients, respectively. Early and late CRC was found in 8% and 2% of patients, respectively, and were located mainly right sided. After adjustment for age, gender and TNM classification, mortality risk was lower in patients with IDA with early CRC diagnosis, but not significantly (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.02).
conclusionEven with extended follow-up, the cause of IDA remains elusive in the majority of patients with IDA in general practice. However, patients with IDA are at increased risk for in particular right-sided CRC and a late diagnosis of CRC appears to have a detrimental effect on survival in patients with IDA.
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.