Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37038135›Full record

Trial reportBMC pediatrics2023

The effectiveness of additional screening examinations for children and adolescents in Germany: a longitudinal retrospective cohort study.

Kathrin Krüger, Anne-Marie Lapstich, Katrin Christiane Reber, Stephanie Sehlen, Sebastian Liersch, Christian Krauth

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kathrin KrügerInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hanover, Germany. krueger.kathrin@mh-hannover.de.
Anne-Marie LapstichInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hanover, Germany.
Katrin Christiane ReberAOK Nordost. Die Gesundheitskasse, Health Services Management, Wilhelmstr. 1, 10963, Berlin, Germany.
Stephanie SehlenAOK Nordost. Die Gesundheitskasse, Health Services Management, Wilhelmstr. 1, 10963, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian LierschAOK Nordost. Die Gesundheitskasse, Health Services Management, Wilhelmstr. 1, 10963, Berlin, Germany.
Christian KrauthInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hanover, Germany.
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContinuous medical care is particularly important in childhood and adolescence. Since there are gaps in regular care in Germany, various health insurance providers offer to cover additional examinations (e.g., U10, U11, J2) to ensure ongoing paediatrician visits. However, the question arises as to whether these examinations are effective. Thus, the main objective of this study is to determine whether participation in the U10, U11 or J2 examinations leads to more frequent and earlier diagnosis and treatment of age-specific diseases.

methodsThe analyses are based on administrative claims data from a statutory health insurance fund. For each examination, an intervention group (IG) is formed and matched with a corresponding control group (CG). Descriptive analyses include proportion with diagnosis and treatment, average age of diagnosis and treatment initiation. Hypothesis testing is performed using methods appropriate to each. In addition, subgroup analyses and binominal logistic regression models are conducted.

resultsMore diagnoses are detected in IG, irrespective of subgroups. Additionally, diagnoses are made slightly earlier on average in IG. In the total samples, more therapies are initiated in IG, and slightly earlier. Considering only diagnosed cases, more therapies are initiated in CG but continue to be started earlier in IG. Regression models show that participation in the examinations has the highest predictive power for detecting a diagnosis. The presence of a chronic disease and sex - male at the U10 and U11 and female at the J2 - are also significantly associated. The models further show that nationality, unemployment of parents and region also have a significant influence in some cases, whereas school-leaving qualification, vocational qualification and income of parents do not. Considering the initiation of treatment in overall samples, the models show similar results, but here the presence of a chronic illness has the highest predictive power.

conclusionThe results indicate that participation in the examinations leads to significantly more diagnoses and, in the overall samples, significantly more treatments. In addition, diagnoses were made somewhat earlier and therapies were initiated somewhat earlier. In the future, it would be useful to investigate the U10, U11 and J2 examinations over a longer time horizon to determine whether the statistically significant difference found is also clinically relevant, i.e., earlier diagnosis and initiation of therapy lead to prevention of manifestation or progression of the diagnosed diseases and to avoidance of secondary diseases.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), DRKS-ID: DRKS00015280. Prospectively registered on 18 March 2019.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningResearch DesignAdolescentChildEarly DiagnosisFemaleForecastingGermanyHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesAdolescentschildrenEarly detectionGermanyPreventionRoutine dataStatutory health insurance data

Identifiers

PMID37038135
PMCPMC10088104
OpenAlexW4363679410

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.