ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2021
Does Provider Type Affect Bone Health Surveillance in Chronic Pancreatitis?
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- A Pilot Study to Assess Opportunistic Use of CT-Scan for Osteoporosis Screening in Chronic Pancreatitis.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBone density screening (DEXA) and vitamin D serum assay (Vit-D) are recommended in chronic pancreatitis, but adherence by providers is unknown.
aimsAssess DEXA/Vit-D testing according to provider type.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of chronic pancreatitis patients followed in a tertiary hospital (August 2017-2018) was conducted. Provider type was primary care (PCP), gastroenterologist, and pancreas specialist. Chi-square test and multivariable analysis were conducted to assess the relation between provider type and DEXA/Vit-D testing. Subset analyses were performed among patients with fecal elastase < 200 mcg/g.
resultsA total of 478 charts were reviewed, and 256 (53.6%) met diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis; 184 (71.9%) definite, 45 (17.6%) probable, and 27 (10.6%) borderline chronic pancreatitis. DEXA was tested in 112/256 (43%) patients; 16/57(28%) patients followed by PCP, 11/38 (28.9%) by gastroenterologists, and 85/161(52.2%) by pancreas specialists (p = 0.001). Vit-D was tested in 210/256 (82.0%) patients; 42/57(73.7%) followed by PCP, 29/38 (76.3%) by gastroenterologists, and 139/161(86.3%) by pancreas specialists (p = 0.06). Multivariate analysis assessing DEXA/Vit-D testing showed pancreas specialists were more likely to test compared to PCP (DEXA: OR 3.70, CI 1.77-7.74, p = 0.001. Vit-D: OR 3.24, CI 1.43-7.38, p = 0.005), but gastroenterologists were not. In patients with low fecal elastase, pancreas specialists were more likely to test DEXA (pancreas specialists: 62.1%, PCP: 40.0%, Gastroenterologists: 11.1%, p = 0.01) and all patients received Vit-D testing.
conclusionsChronic pancreatitis patients often do not receive optimal preventive care. Pancreas specialists were more likely to perform DEXA and Vit-D testing compared to PCP and gastroenterologists. More physician education is needed.
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.