ArticleBMC nursing2023
An integrative review of adult patient-reported reasons for non-urgent use of the emergency department.
Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Strategies to improve care for older adults who present to the emergency department: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Beyond a Diagnosis: A Qualitative Study Exploring Patient and Caregiver Expectations About Emergency Department Visits Amid Uncertainty.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of an innovative "Emergency Department Surge" program for the care and treatment of patients with low-acuity conditions.Healthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Factors Influencing Non-urgent Emergency Department Visits: A Review of the Causes and Impact.Cureus · 2026Review
- Factors associated with avoidable non-urgent emergency department visits in South Tyrol (Italy): a multicentre cross-sectional study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Emergency department culture and the care of older patients with frailty: a focused ethnography.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- A new diagnostic prediction model for infective endocarditis based on the 2023 duke-international society for cardiovascular infectious disease criteria: a multicenter observational study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Observational
- Striving to make the right decision when seeking emergency care: patients' stories of navigating support alternatives in a digital society, a qualitative study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Identifying the needs of parents admitted to the paediatric emergency department.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of COVID-19 and other determinants on the reduction of non-urgent emergency department access in North-East Italy: does supply affect demand?Research in health services & regions · 2025Article
- Prediction Models of Infective Endocarditis Usable Ahead of Performing Blood Cultures: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- The role of family health centres in preventing paediatric emergency department usage of parents of children with non-urgent conditions.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Understanding access to general practice through the lens of candidacy: a critical review of the literature.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Review
- Emergency care in Brazil: factors leading to clinically inappropriate use of emergency care among young adult users in the Brazilian context.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Inappropriate Use of Emergency Services from the Perspective of Primary Care Underutilization in a Local Romanian Context: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo conduct an integrative review of the scientific literature to explore adult patient-reported reasons for using the emergency department (ED) non-urgently.
methodA literature search of CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE was conducted with filters for humans, published January 1, 1990-September 1, 2021, and English language. Methodological quality was assessed using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Checklist for qualitative and National Institutes Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies for quantitative studies. Data was abstracted on study and sample characteristics, and themes/reasons for ED use. Cited reasons were coded using thematic analysis.
resultsNinety-three studies met inclusion criteria. Seven themes were found: need to be risk averse with respect to the health issue; knowledge and awareness of alternative sources of care; dissatisfaction with primary care provider; satisfaction with ED; ED accessibility and convenience resulting in low access burden; referred to the ED by others; and relationships between patients and health care providers. DISCUSSION: This integrative review examined patient-reported reasons for attending the ED on a non-urgent basis. The results suggest that ED patients are heterogenous and many factors influence their decision-making. Considering the complexity with which patients live, treating them as a single entity may be problematic. Limiting excessive non-urgent visits likely requires a multi-pronged approach.
conclusionFor many ED patients, they have a very clear problem which needed to be addressed. Future studies should explore psychosocial factors driving decision-making (e.g., health literacy, health-related personal beliefs, stress and coping ability).
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.