SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
How to assess multimorbidity: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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.
- Air pollution exposure and multimorbidity patterns: evidence from a national cohort study in China.BMC public health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To comprehensively and systematically collect the methods used in the evaluation of patients with multiple chronic diseases both domestically and internationally, summarize and analyze the purpose, characteristics and validity of their initial development, and provide reference for health managers to choose appropriate evaluation methods for multiple chronic diseases. Methods: Analysis of the literature was based on searches conducted across eight electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wan Fang Database, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM). The initial search was completed on January 8, 2024, and the most recent update was conducted on December 10, 2024, with no restriction on the date of publication. The search process adhered to the 2020 PRISMA guidelines for systematic review. Results: 54 literatures meeting the criteria were included, involving 54 evaluation methods of multiple chronic diseases. It can be divided into four categories: (1) assessment based on equal weight of disease count and disease severity; (2) based on physiological and psychological health status assessment; (3) evaluation based on drug use; (4) natural language processing evaluation system. Conclusion: Attention should be paid to the assessment of patients with multiple chronic diseases, and standardized and unified assessment methods should be developed in the future to expand the coverage of diseases and deepen the depth of assessment, so as to provide more comprehensive and accurate health management for the growing number of patients with multiple chronic diseases. Without patient or public contribution: This systematic review is primarily based on the comprehensive analysis of published literature and did not involve new data collection or direct participation of patients, hence there was no direct contribution from patients or the public. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD42024530474.
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.