2019
DOI: 10.1080/20479700.2019.1698864
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A predictive model for decreasing clinical no-show rates in a primary care setting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
18
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
1
18
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The systematic review conducted by Carreras et al showed that at least half of the studies on no-show prediction identified age, gender, distance from home to the healthcare center, weekday, visit time, lead time, and history of previous attendance as predictors of non-attendance; marital status and visit type (first or successive) were also frequently used [14]. Our findings were mostly in line with the results reported by Carreras et al, although we did not find an association between gender and non-attendance, as reported elsewhere [17], [18]. Other studies described that nonattendance was associated with the number of previous appointments [19], [20], the status of the last appointment [21], [22], and the treatment category (e.g., surgery) [23], which was also consistent with our results.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The systematic review conducted by Carreras et al showed that at least half of the studies on no-show prediction identified age, gender, distance from home to the healthcare center, weekday, visit time, lead time, and history of previous attendance as predictors of non-attendance; marital status and visit type (first or successive) were also frequently used [14]. Our findings were mostly in line with the results reported by Carreras et al, although we did not find an association between gender and non-attendance, as reported elsewhere [17], [18]. Other studies described that nonattendance was associated with the number of previous appointments [19], [20], the status of the last appointment [21], [22], and the treatment category (e.g., surgery) [23], which was also consistent with our results.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In these studies, AUCs of 0.81 and 0.886 were reported, respectively. Another approach that has been considered to predict no-show is probit regression in Ahmad et al [ 40 ], obtaining an AUC of 0.7. Other research works used LR in 2019, like those of Chua and Chow [ 41 ] and Dantas et al [ 42 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This limitation makes it very difficult to predict missing attendance on the first visit. Different authors have addressed this problem by means of different techniques such as not including in the analysis patients who do not have a certain number of previous visits [ 5 , 28 ], not including the first appointment in the study [ 7 , 15 , 16 , 21 , 30 , 44 , 53 ], or including a variable that indicates whether the appointment corresponds to the first visit [ 14 , 17 , 20 , 23 , 27 , 29 , 32 , 34 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 56 , 58 , 59 , 60 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The years of publication in the included studies range from 1996 to 2022 with 10 studies published between 2017 and 2022 [ 15 , 16 , 18 24 , 26 ]. Collectively, the studies cross eight countries (USA, Spain, Canada, Great Britain, Poland, Portugal, Australia, and New Zealand) with seven studies originating primarily from the USA [ 15 , 16 , 19 – 22 , 26 ]. Eight of the studies are journal articles [ 15 18 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 26 ] and four studies are conference papers [ 19 , 20 , 23 , 25 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%