Open Access 01-12-2015 | Erratum
Erratum: What is the impact of primary care model type on specialist referral rates? A cross-sectional study
Published in: BMC Primary Care | Issue 1/2015
Login to get accessExcerpt
After publication of this research article [1], we noted an error in Table 2. The values reported under Patient Age had been erroneously inverted, meaning age range “0-21” displayed the value for “57+” and vice versa, and “22-40” displayed the value for “41-56” and vice-versa. This error has been corrected (please see the revised version of Table 2 below). We apologise for any inconvenience.
Independent variable
|
Levels
|
Rate Ratio (RR)
|
95% Confidence interval for RR
|
P-Value
|
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary Care Model
|
CAP-I
|
0.965
|
0.943-0.987
|
0.0021
|
FFS
|
0.940
|
0.917-0.963
|
<.0001
|
|
CAP-NI
|
1.000
|
-
|
.
|
|
Patient characteristics
|
||||
Health Status (ADG)
|
3 (Very Sick)
|
8.464
|
8.358-8.571
|
<.0001
|
2
|
5.846
|
5.787-5.906
|
<.0001
|
|
1
|
3.020
|
2.996-3.043
|
<.0001
|
|
0 (healthy)
|
1.000
|
-
|
.
|
|
Income Quintile
|
5 (High)
|
1.041
|
1.038-1.044
|
<.0001
|
4
|
1.041
|
1.038-1.044
|
<.0001
|
|
3
|
1.031
|
1.028-1.034
|
<.0001
|
|
2
|
1.020
|
1.018-1.023
|
<.0001
|
|
1 (low)
|
1.000
|
-
|
.
|
|
Rurality
|
Rural
|
0.935
|
0.925-0.945
|
<.0001
|
Non-major urban centre
|
0.990
|
0.984-0.995
|
0.0001
|
|
Major urban centre
|
1.000
|
1.000
|
.
|
|
Patient Age
|
57+
|
3.591
|
3.558-3.623
|
<.0001
|
41-56
|
2.986
|
2.962-3.011
|
<.0001
|
|
22-40
|
1.895
|
1.883-1.908
|
<.0001
|
|
0-21
|
1.000
|
-
|
.
|
|
Patient Sex
|
Female vs. male
|
1.172
|
1.169-1.175
|
<.0001
|
Physician Characteristics
|
||||
Physician Sex
|
Female vs. male
|
1.145
|
1.124-1.165
|
<.0001
|
Year of Graduation
|
1.003
|
1.002-1.004
|
<.0001
|
|
Foreign Trained
|
Foreign vs. local
|
0.926
|
0.906-0.946
|
<.0001
|
Time in Model
|
1.001
|
1.001-1.001
|
<.0001
|