ArticleBMJ open2023
Key characteristics of patient complexity and patient complexity conceptual models/measurement tools: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. 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.
- Patient complexity profiles in depression: a machine learning approach to personalized mental health.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Care Complexity Factors and Discharge Destination in an Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe social determinants of health have been gaining recognition, confirming that multidimensional biopsychosocial assessment is essential to improving the health of individuals. This trend has led to the development of conceptual models and measurement tools assessing 'patient complexity', understood as a complex interplay of biopsychosocial factors, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of care; however, the variety of meanings encompassed by the term has led to confusion in the interpretation of patient complexity such that there is no consensus regarding the definition or conceptualisation of patient complexity. The primary objective of this scoping review is to identify and map what is known about the key characteristics of patient complexity through multiple database searches. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will follow an established framework for conducting scoping reviews. The data will be extracted through searches of MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. Included articles will have: investigated participants aged 19 years or older, with any health condition; described patient complexity, a model for patient complexity, or a measurement tool for patient complexity; and been published in English from 1 January 1970 to April 2022. Article selection and data extraction will be conducted independently by two reviewers and if necessary for consensus, a third reviewer. A descriptive summary will be prepared to explain how the results apply to the scoping review questions. The findings will be a detailed mapping of the health dimensions that emerge from the classification of the extracted data. Subsequently, a definition of patient complexity will be developed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethical approval, as we will use publicly available data. The study findings will be disseminated through a relevant conference presentation and a peer-reviewed journal. This protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework (www.osf.io/hpa3c).
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.