Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33239869›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2020

Continuity of Care in Swiss Cancer Patients Using Claims Data.

Eva Blozik, Caroline Bähler, Markus Näpflin, Martin Scherer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Eva BlozikDepartment of Health Sciences, Helsana Group, Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0620-6873
Caroline BählerDepartment of Health Sciences, Helsana Group, Zürich, Switzerland.
Markus NäpflinDepartment of Health Sciences, Helsana Group, Zürich, Switzerland.
Martin SchererDepartment of General Practice, Primary Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Helsana Group (Switzerland) · CHUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContinuity of care is positively associated with beneficial patient outcomes. Data on the level of continuity of care in the ambulatory setting in Switzerland are lacking.

aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate continuity of care in Swiss cancer patients based on routine data of mandatory health insurance using four established continuity scales.

methodsRetrospective analysis of Swiss claims data (N=23'515 patients with incident use of antineoplastics). The Usual Provider Continuity score, the Modified Modified Continuity Index, the Continuity of Care index, and the Sequential Continuity Index were analyzed based on consultations with general practitioners (GPs), physician specialists and ambulatory hospital wards.

resultsUsing information of health insurance claims, the number of consultations and the general level of continuity of care in Swiss cancer patients are high. Continuity of care scores were significantly associated with sociodemographic and regional factors. When focusing on consultations with GPs only, all four scores consistently showed high values indicating high levels of continuity. Continuity with general practitioners was associated with lower costs and lower risks for hospitalization and death.

conclusionThis is the first study giving insight into continuity of care in Swiss cancer patients. The present study shows that continuity of care is measurable using health insurance claims data. It indicates that continuity with general practitioners is associated with a beneficial outcome.

Indexed as

cancercareclaims datacontinuityhealth insurancescale

Identifiers

PMID33239869
PMCPMC7680672
OpenAlexW3099271575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.