ArticleBMJ open2022
Impact of digital interdisciplinary consultation on secondary care referrals by general practitioners: a protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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.
- Impact of an interdisciplinary digital consultation platform on general practitioner referrals for musculoskeletal symptoms: a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.Family practice · 2025Trial
- Collaboration between general practitioners and psychiatrists via digital platforms in the Netherlands: advantages and specific limiting factors.BMC primary care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOptimal collaboration between general practice and hospital care is crucial to maintain affordable and sustainable access to healthcare for the entire population. General practitioners (GPs) are the gatekeepers to specialist care and patients will visit hospitals mostly only after referral. However, a substantial part of these referrals may be inappropriate, as communication between GPs and medical specialists can be challenging and referring patients may be the most obvious action for a GP to perform.A new digital platform (Prisma) connects GPs and specialists in interdisciplinary groups and facilitates asynchronous, accessible and fast teleconsultation within the group. No previous research has been done to evaluate the impact of this new platform on the referral rates to the hospital. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be performed in Zwolle region in the Netherlands to analyse the effect of introduction of the platform on rate of inappropriate referrals to orthopaedic surgery. In four steps, GPs in the region will be given access to the platform. GPs will be part of the control condition until randomisation to the intervention. According to our sample size calculation, we need to include 18 practices with 1008 patients presenting with hip and knee symptoms. Routine care data of hospital registrations will be analysed to calculate the rate of inappropriate referrals (primary outcome). Secondary outcome are costs, primary and secondary care workload, posted cases and user satisfaction. Alongside this quantitative analysis, we will evaluate patient experience, facilitators and barriers for use of the platform. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The medical ethics review board of University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), the Netherlands (METc-number: 2021/288) has confirmed that the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) does not apply to the process evaluation because the study does not involve randomisation of patients or different medical treatments (letter number: M21.275351). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL9704.
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.