Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11761208›Full record

ReviewThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2001

Informal carers and the primary care team.

C Simon

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

C SimonDepartment of Primary Medical Care, Aldermoor Health Centre, University of Southampton.
Primary Health Care · QA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of carers in the community is rising, and the importance of general practice in providing supportfor them has been highlighted. Caring for a disabled friend or relative has been shown to be harmful to the health of the caregiver and changes in social and family structure have led carers to become isolated and more reliant on the formal support services. However, many carersfeel that GPs do not understand their needs, and in turn many GPs and nursesfeel that they lack the relevant resources and training to take a more proactive role. The shift from hospital to community-based care and the blurring of social roles of responsibility puts additional pressure on the carers and community services. However general practice is in the best position to help and there are many things that can be done by primary care teams, such as providing information about available support, benefits and local services, which would be appreciated by informal carers.

Indexed as

CaregiversHumansPatient Care TeamPrimary Health CareSocial SupportUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID11761208
PMCPMC1314151
OpenAlexW1811199259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.