Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39713006›Full record

ArticleHealth care transitions2023

Provider's perspectives regarding transitional urologic care process: A scoping review.

Michael Chua, Lai Nam Tse, Mandy Rickard, Peter Wang, Jan Michael Silangcruz, Joana Dos Santos, Abby Varghese, Natasha Brownrigg, Jessica Ming, Armando Lorenzo and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Health care transitions, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors.

Michael ChuaGlobal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lai Nam TseDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Mandy RickardDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Peter WangDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Jan Michael SilangcruzInstitute of Urology, St. Luke's Medical Center, Quezon City, NCR, Philippines.
Joana Dos SantosDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abby VargheseDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Natasha BrownriggDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jessica MingDepartment of Surgery, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Armando LorenzoDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Darius BagliDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To generate a scoping review that summarizes perceptions and attitudes of urology providers towards the transitional urologic care process. Likewise, summarize their identified barriers, facilitators, and ideal transition care for patients with genitourinary conditions. Method: A systematic literature search was performed in Oct 2021. Records were identified for studies relevant to assessing urology specialists' practice variation, perception of barriers, and attitudes toward transitional care of patients needing life-long urologic care. The methodological quality of the cross-sectional studies was assessed using AXIS. The information extracted was clustered according to identified themes from the included studies. This scoping review was part of a systematic review registered on PROSPERO-(CRD42022306229). Results: A total of 641 records were retrieved from electronic medical databases and cross-referencing. Ultimately, ten studies were included in this scoping review, conducted in the USA (n = 7), Canada, United Kingdom, and Italy. There is a wide variation in transitional care practices and preferences. However, the common themes extracted were: appropriate age to start the transition, additional training of the providers involved in transitional care, common transition plans, and practices, characteristics of multidisciplinary teams, potential barriers, areas of improvement, or facilitators for a better transitional process. Conclusion: Common to all reports, multiple barriers are perceived. Areas that require improvement and multidisciplinary systems are needed to enhance urologic transition care. In addition, factors such as the age cut-off between pediatric and adult care or which specialist should handle specific procedures and conditions before, during, and after transition are still unclear and typically depend on the stakeholders.

Indexed as

Providers surveyScoping reviewTransitional urologic care

Identifiers

PMID39713006
PMCPMC11658119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.