ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2024
Should primary care physicians consult on their admitted patients? A single-center survey study.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inpatient consults for primary care physicians.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the rise of hospital medicine, care has become fragmented between inpatient and outpatient settings. Having primary care physicians (PCPs) consult on their admitted patients through televisits could improve patient and hospital outcomes, but perspectives on this model are unknown in adult hospital medicine. Methods: A single-center cross-sectional survey was conducted to compare PCP and hospitalist attitudes regarding PCP telemedicine consultation for admitted patients in a large US academic hospital. Results: A total of 120 participants (52 hospitalists and 68 PCPs) responded to the survey. Most hospitalists believed that their patients would benefit from PCP consultation, with 45.8% believing it was slightly important, 18.8% moderately important, and 22.9% quite important. The level of importance did not seem to influence the effort required, as most hospitalists would put in only a little effort (35.4%) to obtain a PCP consultation. PCPs were more inclined to consult on their admitted patients; 18.6% considered it slightly important to obtain their consultation, 35.6% believed it was moderately important, and 23.7% believed it was quite important. PCPs were willing to put more effort into setting up a PCP consultation (some effort, 45.8%) vs hospitalists (little effort, 35.4%). The most common challenge perceived by both groups was time commitment (hospitalists, 78.8%; PCPs, 75.0%). Conclusions: Both hospitalists and PCPs agree that a PCP consultation would benefit the patient's medical care in specific situations. However, views on the importance and frequency of PCP consultations vary between the two groups.
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.