A rapid evidence map of what evidence is available on the effectiveness of community diagnostic centres
Wale, A.; Okolie, C.; Everitt, J.; Hookway, A.; Shaw, H.; Little, K.; Lewis, R.; Cooper, A.; Edwards, A. A.
Show abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased demand and delays to diagnostic services. Community diagnostic centres (which are generally referred to as Regional Diagnostic Hubs in Wales) aim to reduce this backlog and the waiting times for patients by providing a broad range of elective diagnostic services in the community, away from acute hospital facilities. As diagnostic services account for over 85% of clinical pathways and cost the National Health Service (NHS) over six billion pounds a year (NHS 2022), community diagnostic centres across a broader range of diagnostic services may be an effective, efficient, and cost-effective introduction to the UK health sector. This Rapid Evidence Map aimed to identify, describe, and map the available evidence on the effectiveness of diagnostic centres. 50 primary studies were identified. Studies were published between 1995 and 2021: A wide range of study designs were used, and studies were conducted in a range of countries including the UK. 30 studies were specific to cancer diagnosis, whilst the remaining 20 studies focused on diagnosis associated with: anaemia, autism, cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, multiple sclerosis, respiratory conditions, shoulder pain, and unexplained fever Eleven studies reported information on multi-condition diagnostic centres, rather than a specific condition. The majority of studies were conducted within hospital settings. Two studies evaluated diagnostic centres within a community setting. The diagnostic centres offered a wide range of diagnostic tests and incorporated different staff and facilities. Participants were mainly referred by GPs, primary care centres and emergency departments. However, referrals were also made from outpatient clinics located within the same hospital as the diagnostic centre. Over 100 different outcomes were reported covering: patient data and referral outcomes, clinical outcomes, performance outcomes, economic outcomes, and patient and physician-reported outcomes. The findings of this rapid evidence map were used to select a substantive focus for a subsequent rapid review on community diagnostic centres that can be accessed by primary care teams.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Mapping factors that may influence attrition and retention of midwives: a scoping review protocol 93%
- The United Kingdom Research study into Ethnicity And COVID-19 outcomes in Healthcare workers (UK-REACH): Protocol for a prospective longitudinal cohort study of healthcare and ancillary workers in UK healthcare settings 93%
- The use of the positive deviance approach for healthcare system service improvement: A scoping review protocol 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Knowledge mobilisation of rapid evidence reviews to inform health and social care policy and practice in a public health emergency: appraisal of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre processes and impact, 2021-23 95%
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 94%
- STIMULATE-ICP-CAREINEQUAL - Defining usual care and examining inequalities in Long Covid support: protocol for a mixed-methods study (part of STIMULATE-ICP: Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways) 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- National statutory reporting: not even ticking the boxes? The quality of ‘Learning from Deaths’ reporting in Quality Accounts within the NHS in England 2017-2020 93%
- Evaluating the impact of an enhanced support implementation of the PReCePT (PRevention of Cerebral palsy in Pre-Term labour) quality improvement toolkit to increase the uptake of magnesium sulphate in pre-term deliveries for the prevention of neurodisabilities: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial 92%
- An observational study of survival outcomes of people referred for ‘fast-track’ end-of-life care funding in a District General Hospital; too little too late? 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- The TARCiS statement: Guidance on terminology, application, and reporting of citation searching 92%
- Adherence to the test, trace and isolate system: results from a time series of 21 nationally representative surveys in the UK (the COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses study) 91%
- Features of 16,749 hospitalised UK patients with COVID-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Hospital admissions among adolescents with local authority care experience or special educational needs in England: a population-based cohort study using linked administrative data from health, education and social care services 90%
- Ongoing symptoms and functional impairment 12 weeks after testing positive to SARS-CoV-2 or influenza in Australia: an observational cohort study 90%
- COVID-19 mass testing in adult social care in England 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.