Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37407088›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2023

Blood test result communication in primary care: mixed-methods systematic review protocol.

Helen Nankervis, Alyson Huntley, Penny Whiting, William Hamilton, Hardeep Singh, Sarah Dawson, Jane Sprackman, Anna Ferguson Montague, Jessica Watson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
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

9 authors.

Helen NankervisUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK helen.nankervis@bristol.ac.uk.
Alyson HuntleyUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Penny WhitingUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1138-5682
William HamiltonUniversity of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Hardeep SinghBaylor College of Medicine, Houston, USA.
Sarah DawsonUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Jane SprackmanUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Anna Ferguson MontagueUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Jessica WatsonUniversity of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8177-6438

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAfter testing, ensuring test results are communicated and actioned is important for patient safety, with failure or delay in diagnosis the most common cause of malpractice claims in primary care worldwide. Identifying interventions to improve test communication from the decision to test through to sharing of results has important implications for patient safety, GP workload, and patient engagement.

aimTo assess the factors around communication of blood test results between primary care providers (for example GPs, nurses, reception staff) and their patients and carers. DESIGN &

settingA mixed methods systematic review including primary studies involving communication of blood test results in primary care.

methodThe review will use a segregated convergent synthesis method. Qualitative information will be synthesised using a meta-aggregative approach, and quantitative data will be meta-analysed or synthesised if pooling of studies is appropriate and data are available. If not, data will be presented in tabular and descriptive summary form.

conclusionThis review has the potential to provide conclusions about blood test result communication interventions and factors important to stakeholders, including barriers and facilitators to improved communication.

Indexed as

Blood testscommunicationhematological testspatient-centred carepatient satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID37407088
PMCPMC11176682

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.