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