ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Construction and Evaluation of the Bidirectional Referral System in Internet Hospital: Case Study of Children's Hospital in Western China.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) emphasizes internet IT as pivotal for optimizing health care system efficiency. Traditional bidirectional referral (TBR) systems, hindered by manual processes and information asymmetry, face challenges in pediatric care. While internet bidirectional referral (IBR) systems demonstrate effectiveness compared to TBR methods, comparative performance analyses remain remarkably scarce. Objective: This study aims to develop a systematic and standardized bidirectional referral framework for internet hospitals and analyze the differences in core referral indicators of referral time and postreferral medical expenses between TBR (2019-2021) and IBR (2022-2024) at the Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort study that includes patients aged 0-18 years with chronic diseases and complex cases in both TBR and IBR periods, while excluding emergency cases. We compared the differences between TBR and IBR across multiple dimensions, including demographic characteristics, downward-to-upward transfer ratio, core indicators (referral times and postreferral medical expenses) and referred diseases, and medical departments. Results: This study included a total of 457 referral cases, with 106 in the TBR group (79 upward and 27 downward, resulting in a downward-to-upward referral ratio of 34.18%) and 351 in the IBR group (329 upward and 22 downward, resulting in a downward-to-upward referral ratio of 6.69%). Compared with the TBR group, the median referral time in the IBR group was significantly shorter (0.90 d vs 2.51 d; P<.001), and the median postreferral medical expenses were lower (¥13,091.16 [US $1822.34] vs ¥8380.59 [US $1166.61]; P=.01). We observed that in both groups, the respiratory department consistently ranked as the top specialty for upward referrals, with pneumonia emerging as the most prevalent diagnosis for such transfers. Conclusions: In pediatric care, the IBR system improved referral efficiency and reduced postreferral medical expenses compared with TBR methods, but there is still a low downward referral rate. While the IBR system shows promise and merits widespread adoption, further validation across diverse medical institutions and broader populations is necessary.
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.