Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32134389›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Improvement of the Efficiency and Completeness of Neuro-Oncology Patient Referrals to a Tertiary Center Through the Implementation of an Electronic Referral System: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Rocío Fernández-Méndez, Mei Yin Wong, Rebecca J Rastall, Samuel Rebollo-Díaz, Ingela Oberg, Stephen J Price, Alexis J Joannides

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Rocío Fernández-MéndezDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4989-0687
Mei Yin WongDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0856-1446
Rebecca J RastallDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4034-8274
Samuel Rebollo-DíazObex Technologies, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3469-4050
Ingela ObergNeurosurgery Department, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4218-0575
Stephen J PriceDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7535-3009
Alexis J JoannidesDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6618-256X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundQuality referrals to specialist care are key for prompt, optimal decisions about the management of patients with brain tumors.

objectiveThis study aimed to determine the impact of introducing a Web-based, electronic referral (eReferral) system to a specialized neuro-oncology center, using a service-developed proforma, in terms of waiting times and information completeness.

methodsWe carried out a retrospective cohort study based on the review of medical records of referred adult patients, excluding follow-ups. Primary outcome measures were durations of three key phases within the referral pathway and completion rates of six referral fields.

resultsA total of 248 patients were referred to the specialist center during the study period. Median (IQR) diagnostic imaging to referral intervals were 3 (1-5) days with eReferrals, and 9 (4-19), 19 (14-49), and 8 (4-23) days with paper proforma, paper letter, and internal referrals, respectively (P<.001). Median (IQR) referral to multidisciplinary team decision intervals were 3 (2-7), 2 (1-3), 8 (2-24), and 3 (2-6) days respectively (P=.01). For patients having surgery, median (IQR) diagnostic imaging to surgery intervals were 28 (21-41), 34 (27-51), 104 (69-143), and 32 (15-89) days, respectively (P<.001). Proportions of complete fields differed significantly by referral type in all study fields (all with Ps <.001) except for details of presentation, which were present in all referrals. All study fields were always present in eReferrals, as these are compulsory for referral submission. Depending on the data field, level of completeness in the remaining referral types ranged within 69% (65/94) to 87% (82/94), 15% (3/20) to 65% (13/20), and 22% (8/41) to 63% (26/41) in paper proforma, paper letter, and internal referrals, respectively.

conclusionsAn electronic, Web-based, service-developed specific proforma for neuro-oncology referrals performs significantly better, with shorter waiting times and greater completeness of information than other referral types. A wider application of eReferrals is an important first step to streamlining specialist care pathways and providing excellent care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/10.2196/15002.

Indexed as

AdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsNervous System DiseasesReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesTertiary Care Centerselectronic health recordshospital oncology serviceshospital referralquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID32134389
PMCPMC7082731

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.