Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32503516›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

A survey to assess awareness and opinion of initiatives and recommendations on low-value diagnostic practices.

Xavier Bonfill, Karla Salas-Gama, Carolina Requeijo, Angela Merchán-Galvis, Antonio Sánchez, Elena Medarde, M Jesús Quintana, DianaHealth Study Group

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Xavier BonfillCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública, Hospital de Sant Pau, IIBSant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
Karla Salas-GamaCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública, Hospital de Sant Pau, IIBSant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
Carolina RequeijoCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública, Hospital de Sant Pau, IIBSant Pau, Barcelona, Spain. crequeijo@santpau.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3479-4550
Angela Merchán-GalvisCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública, Hospital de Sant Pau, IIBSant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
Antonio SánchezUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Elena MedardeConsorci Sanitari de Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain.
M Jesús QuintanaCentro Cochrane Iberoamericano. Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública, Hospital de Sant Pau, IIBSant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
DianaHealth Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe need to reduce healthcare practices that provide no value has led to the development of initiatives that generate and publish recommendations to improve the appropriateness of clinical practice by identifying potentially inappropriate services, making recommendations, and proposing improvements. DianaHealth (www.dianahealth.com) identifies, classifies, and publishes recommendations from numerous scientific societies. The purpose of this study was to determine the awareness and perceived usefulness and applicability of published recommendations on low-value diagnostic measures, as judged by physicians who are recognised clinical leaders in their respective centres.

methodsWe designed a questionnaire on the diagnostic recommendations considered relevant for each medical specialty and made it available, until September 2016, on DianaHealth. The survey was administered online to clinical leaders from 25 Spanish healthcare centres (hospitals and primary care centres).

resultsA total of 413 (40.0%) physicians from 34 different specialties participated. The participation rate varied between centres (range 21.1%-100.0%) and specialties (range 12.5%-78.9%). Do Not Do (57.1%) was the most widely-known initiative. Most participants (82.6%; IQR 77.9%-94.9%) stated that they knew at least one of the 12 initiatives that identify non-recommended practices, and on average they were aware of four initiatives (range 1-12). The initiatives were perceived useful by 82.4% (IQR 73.3%-90.4%), and perceived applicable by 75.6% (IQR 67.4%-86.8%). A total of 531 recommendations were assessed. Sixty-three percent (IQR 53.6%-77.5%) of participants reported they were aware of the recommendations for their corresponding specialty. A total of 84.5% (IQR 75.0%-90.0%) stated they agreed with the recommendations and 84.5% (IQR 75.0%-90.0%) considered them useful. Among those who agreed with their respective recommendations, a median of 51.5% (IQR 41.4%-60.9%) perceived the guidelines as being fully implemented, 40.1% (IQR 31.9%-46.8%) considered them partially implemented, and 7.1% (IQR 3.7%-12.9%), not implemented.

conclusionsClinical leaders' awareness of initiatives that generate and publish recommendations to improve clinical appropriateness remains low, although they did consider them useful. In general, participants were familiar with their speciality-specific diagnostic recommendations, agreed with them, and perceived them as useful and implemented in their centres. More needs to be done to raise awareness among professionals who do not know of or apply these recommendations.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Techniques and ProceduresHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePractice Guidelines as TopicCross-Sectional StudiesGuideline AdherenceHumansLeadershipPhysiciansSpainSurveys and QuestionnairesAppropriatenessDianaHealthLow-value careSurvey

Identifiers

PMID32503516
PMCPMC7275495

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.