ArticleJournal of general and family medicine2019
Preliminary study: Descriptive analysis of longitudinal data on the international session of the Japan Primary Care Association annual conference, 2012-2018.
Article in Journal of general and family medicine, 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.
- Preliminary study: Descriptive analysis of longitudinal data on the international session of the Japan Primary Care Association annual conference, 2012-2018.Journal of general and family medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionJapan Primary Care Association has launched an international session at annual conference since 2012. Longitudinal characteristics of the presentations were investigated.
methodsAbstracts of the session were analyzed regarding type of presentation (oral/poster), category (research/clinical case/activity/review), and presenters' geographical location.
resultsThe numbers of oral and poster presentations significantly increased. The most frequent presentation was research with cross-sectional survey. Majority of presentations were clinical and less educational research, most of which were by Japanese.
conclusionThe numbers of presentations in the international session increased, but the session should be used more rigorously to enhance primary care.
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.