Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36124102›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2022

Outcomes of General Internal Medicine Consultations for Diagnosis from Specialists in a Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Masashi Yokose, Yukinori Harada, Shogo Hanai, Shusaku Tomiyama, Taro Shimizu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of general medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Current management ofFujita medical journal · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. 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

5 authors.

Masashi YokoseDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University Hospital, Mibu, Tochigi, 321-0293, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2685-0658
Yukinori HaradaDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University Hospital, Mibu, Tochigi, 321-0293, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6042-7397
Shogo HanaiDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University Hospital, Mibu, Tochigi, 321-0293, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8316-8540
Shusaku TomiyamaDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University Hospital, Mibu, Tochigi, 321-0293, Japan.
Taro ShimizuDepartment of Diagnostic and Generalist Medicine, Dokkyo Medical University Hospital, Mibu, Tochigi, 321-0293, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The data on the diagnostic contribution of general internal medicine (GIM) consultations for undiagnosed health problems from specialists are scarce. This study aims to explore the role of generalists as diagnostic medicine consultants in tertiary care settings. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study at a Japanese university hospital. GIM consultations for diagnosis from other departments on outpatients aged ≧ 20 years from January 2018 to December 2020 were included. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. The primary outcome was new diagnosis rates. The secondary outcomes were new diagnosis rates with clinical significance and clinical outcomes at 90 days from the index visit. Results: A total of 328 patients were included. The top five consulting departments were orthopedics (17.0%), cardiovascular (10.3%), otorhinolaryngology (8.8%), neurology (8.8%), and gastroenterology (7.9%). GIM identified 456 chief complaints (CCs), and the top five were fever (10.9%), abnormal laboratory results (8.3%), fatigue (5.9%), and pain (7.4%) or numbness (4.6%) in the extremities. There were 139 (104/328 patients: 31.8%) specialty consultations from GIM, and the top five departments were rheumatology (21.1%), gastroenterology (19.2%), orthopedics (9.6%), psychiatry (9.6%), and neurology (9.6%). In total, 277 new diagnoses were established in 232 patients (70.7%), and 203 patients had new diagnoses with clinical significance (61.8%). Clinical outcomes at 90 days from the time of the index visit were resolution/improvement (60.7%), unchanged/worsened (22.3%), and unknown (17.0%). Conclusion: Over 70% of GIM consultations from other departments established new diagnoses with favorable outcomes in >60% of the patients.

Indexed as

consultationdiagnostic errordiagnostic excellencediagnostic uncertaintyspecialists

Identifiers

PMID36124102
PMCPMC9482410

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.