Observational studyBMJ open2026
What factors influence patient participation in an artificial intelligence-based initiative to optimise referrals from primary to specialist haematology care? A multicentre retrospective observational study in four Spanish hospitals.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIncreasing demand for haematological specialist care makes the optimisation of referrals and outpatient workflow a priority. Automated placing of standardised test orders prior to the first appointment may provide haematologists with necessary information to reach diagnoses and initiate treatment at the first patient encounter, reducing low-value follow-up appointments. We aimed to evaluate rates of patient participation in an initiative using artificial intelligence to place standardised test orders as well as reasons for non-participation, differences in the number of participants and non-participants discharged back to primary care with a diagnosis or appropriate treatment plan, and potentially avoidable referrals.
designA retrospective, multicentric cohort study.
settingFour academic hospitals in Madrid, Spain.
participants18 190 patients referred for a first haematologist appointment for 11 included presenting complaints.
interventionReferral notes from primary care were classified using natural language processing and automated placement of standardised test order sets was carried out prior to first appointment for participating patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared demographic differences between participants and non-participants, the main motives for not participating, and the number of patients discharged back to primary care at first appointment with a diagnosis and treatment plan. Most frequent International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision codes for each of the included presenting complaints were described.
resultsDuring the study period, 18 190 (41%) patients were referred for a first haematologist appointment for presenting complaints included in the intervention ('eligible patients'), of which 612 (3.3%) patients agreed to participate in the intervention. Participants were significantly younger than non-participants. Most common motives for not participating were administrative reasons (6268, 76.9%). Only 122 (1.5%) patients expressed explicit unwillingness to participate. A significant increase in the number of patients discharged upon first appointment was observed for participants (146 (23.9%) vs 3375 (19.36%); p=0.041), signifying a 22% relative reduction in avoidable follow-up. The diagnosis 'haematological disorders ruled out' was constantly observed as one of the ten most common diagnoses made by the haematology specialist for all but one of the included presenting complaints.
conclusionNatural language processing of referrals from primary to specialist haematology care with automated placing of standardised test orders can decrease low-value follow-up appointments. Explicit refusal to participate was low. Participants tended to be younger than non-participants, underlining the importance of designing strategies to target the older population in order to improve participation.
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.