Skip to main content

Table 1 Evidence profile for a systematic review on telephone consultation in general practice

From: Telephone consultations for general practice: a systematic review

Quality assessment

Summary of findings

Importance

No of patients

Effect

Quality

No of studies

Design

Limitations

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Other considerations

Telephone

Face-to-face

Difference

(95% CI)

Absolute

Doctor time/min (SD)

1a

Randomized trial

No serious limitations

NA

No serious indirectness

No serious imprecision

Publication bias a possibility

181

187

MD −1.5 (−2.4 to −0.6)

1.5 min less per patient (from 36 s less to 2.4 min less)

HIGH

CRITICAL

Subsequent GP contact (mean (SD), N)

1a

Randomized trial

No serious limitations

NA

No serious indirectness

Some imprecision

Publication bias a possibility

182

188

MD 0.2 (0.0 to 0.3)

2 more visits per 10 people (from 3 more to no more)

HIGH

CRITICAL

BP measured (n/N)

1a

Randomized trial

No serious limitations

NA

No serious indirectness

Some imprecision

Publication bias a possibility

12/181

25/188

RR 0.5 (0.26, 0.96)

7 less BPs measured per 100 (from 13 less to 6 less)

HIGH

IMPORTANT

Subsequent A&E contact (mean (SD), N)

1a

Randomized trial

No serious limitations

NA

No serious indirectness

Some imprecision

Publication bias a possibility

182

188

MD 0.0b (−0.1 to 0.0)

No more visits per 10 people

HIGH

CRITICAL

  1. MD Mean difference, RR relative risk
  2. aMcKinstry et al. (2002)
  3. bNot statistically significant