Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33066729›Full record

SynthesisBMC family practice2020

Factors influencing general practitioners decisions to refer Paediatric patients to the emergency department: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Ciara Conlon, Emma Nicholson, Beatriz Rodríguez-Martin, Roisin O'Donovan, Aoife De Brún, Thérѐse McDonnell, Gerard Bury, Eilish McAuliffe

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Context factors in clinical decision-making: a scoping review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ciara ConlonCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (IRIS), UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland. ciara.conlon@ucd.ie.ORCID 0000-0001-8446-7326
Emma NicholsonCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (IRIS), UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Beatriz Rodríguez-MartinFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Avd. Real Fabrica de Sedas s/n. 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Toledo, Spain.
Roisin O'DonovanCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (IRIS), UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Aoife De BrúnCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (IRIS), UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Thérѐse McDonnellCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (IRIS), UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Gerard BurySchool of Medicine, Health Sciences Centre, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Eilish McAuliffeCentre for Interdisciplinary Research, Education and Innovation in Health Systems (IRIS), UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
University College Dublin · IEUniversity of Castilla-La Mancha · ES

Funding

Health Research Board NCHF-2017-009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical guidelines are integral to a general practitioner's decision to refer a paediatric patient to emergency care. The influence of non-clinical factors must also be considered. This review explores the non-clinical factors that may influence general practitioners (GPs) when deciding whether or not to refer a paediatric patient to the Emergency Department (ED).

methodsA systematic review of peer-reviewed literature published from August 1980 to July 2019 was conducted to explore the non-clinical factors that influence GPs' decision-making in referring paediatric patients to the emergency department. The results were synthesised using a narrative approach.

resultsSeven studies met the inclusion criteria. Non-clinical factors relating to patients, GPs and health systems influence GPs decision to refer children to the ED. GPs reported parents/ caregivers influence, including their perception of severity of child's illness, parent's request for onward referral and GPs' appraisal of parents' ability to cope. Socio-economic status, GPs' aversion to risk and system level factors such as access to diagnostics and specialist services also influenced referral decisions.

conclusionsA myriad of non-clinical factors influence GP referrals of children to the ED. Further research on the impact of non-clinical factors on clinical decision-making can help to elucidate patterns and trends of paediatric healthcare and identify areas for intervention to utilise resources efficiently and improve healthcare delivery.

Indexed as

General PractitionersChildDecision MakingEmergency Service, HospitalHumansParentsReferral and ConsultationDecision-makingNon-clinical factorsPaediatricReferralsUnscheduled healthcare

Identifiers

PMID33066729
PMCPMC7568398
OpenAlexW3092991744

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.