Primary care research networks: an evolving model meriting national evaluation.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Evaluation of the research capacity and culture of allied health professionals in a large regional public health service.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2019
   Article
2. Developing primary care: the contribution of primary care research networks.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2012
   Article
3. An evaluation of the 'Designated Research Team' approach to building research capacity in primary care.BMC family practice · 2008
   Article
4. A framework to evaluate research capacity building in health care.BMC family practice · 2005
   Article
5. Primary care trusts and primary care research.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005
   Article
6. [Theme networks in cooperative research].Atencion primaria · 2003
   Article
7. Proposed new law on manslaughter: implications for the NHS and doctors.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2001
   Article
8. Sexual health promotion--inner-city style.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2001
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as