ArticleBMJ open2018
Patients' attendance patterns to different healthcare settings and perceptions of stakeholders regarding screening for chronic, non-communicable diseases in high street dental practices and community pharmacy: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perceptions of mental health screening and referral to treatment in National Dental-Practice Based Research Network practices: A qualitative study.Journal of public health dentistry · 2024Article
- Willingness for Medical Screening in a Dental Setting-A Pilot Questionnaire Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Concordance of three point of care testing devices with clinical chemistry laboratory standard assays and patient-reported outcomes of blood sampling methods.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Article
- The Dental Team: An Additional Resource for Delivering Vaccinations.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- Periodontal care in general practice: 20 important FAQs - Part one.British dental journal · 2019Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveNon-communicable diseases (NCDs) impose a significant health and economic burden. This study aimed to assess the differential attendance patterns of public to different healthcare professionals and gauge the opinions of key stakeholders towards screening of NCDs by allied healthcare professionals.
designQuestionnaires were designed piloted and subsequently completed by key stakeholders. The results were analysed descriptively.
settingPublic questionnaires were undertaken in a West Midlands transport station and Public Markets. High street dental and community pharmacy settings were selected via local clinical and research networks. Healthcare professionals were identified using professional networks and were emailed a web link to an online survey.
participants1371 members of the public, 1548 patients and 222 healthcare professionals (doctors general practitioner (GP), dentists general dental practitioner (GDP) and pharmacists) completed the questionnaires. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome was to compare attendance patterns at GDP and GP practices to determine whether different populations were more likely to access different healthcare professionals, this included determining when patients were last screened for NCDs by their GP. Additionally, the willingness of patients to undergo the required intervention and the opinions of stakeholders regarding the concept of screening for the specified NCDs in general dental and community pharmacy settings were also explored.
results12% of patients who reported seeing a GDP biannually reported that they had not had contact with a GP in the last year. Over 61% of the public reported attending a GDP biannually, of this group 48% reported having never had a check-up at the GP. All stakeholders surveyed were in broad support of the concept of allied health professionals undertaking screening for specific general health conditions.
conclusionsThis study has established that allied healthcare professionals may have access to different cohorts of the population to GPs. If GDPs and pharmacists have access to patients who are not using healthcare services elsewhere, they may be ideally placed to risk assess, and where appropriate offer preventative advice and test for NCDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.