Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36498188›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Evaluation of Complexity Measurement Tools for Correlations with Health-Related Outcomes, Health Care Costs and Impacts on Healthcare Providers: A Scoping Review.

Hiromitsu Kaneko, Akiko Hanamoto, Sachiko Yamamoto-Kataoka, Yuki Kataoka, Takuya Aoki, Kokoro Shirai, Hiroyasu Iso

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 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
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  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

7 authors.

Hiromitsu KanekoFaculty of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Akiko HanamotoIndependent Researcher, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8233, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7467-9744
Sachiko Yamamoto-KataokaDepartment of Health Informatics, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine/School of Public Health, Yoshida Konoe-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan.
Yuki KataokaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kyoto Min-Iren Asukai Hospital, Tanaka Asukai-cho 89, Kyoto 606-8226, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7982-5213
Takuya AokiSection of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Community Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Shogoin Kawara-cho 54, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8232-2155
Kokoro ShiraiDepartment of Social Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Hiroyasu IsoDepartment of Social Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9241-7289

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Various tools to measure patient complexity have been developed. Primary care physicians often deal with patient complexity. However, their usefulness in primary care settings is unclear. This study explored complexity measurement tools in general adult and patient populations to investigate the correlations between patient complexity and outcomes, including health-related patient outcomes, healthcare costs, and impacts on healthcare providers. We used a five-stage scoping review framework, searching MEDLINE and CINAHL, including reference lists of identified studies. A total of 21 patient complexity management tools were found. Twenty-five studies examined the correlation between patient complexity and health-related patient outcomes, two examined healthcare costs, and one assessed impacts on healthcare providers. No studies have considered sharing information or action plans with multidisciplinary teams while measuring outcomes for complex patients. Of the tools, eleven used face-to-face interviews, seven extracted data from medical records, and three used self-assessments. The evidence of correlations between patient complexity and outcomes was insufficient for clinical implementation. Self-assessment tools might be convenient for conducting further studies. A multidisciplinary approach is essential to develop effective intervention protocols. Further research is required to determine these correlations in primary care settings.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsHealth PersonnelAdultHumanshealth-related outcomespatient complexityprimary carescoping reviewtools

Identifiers

PMID36498188
PMCPMC9741446

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.