Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12841048›Full record

ReviewThe Milbank quarterly2003

Strengthening research to improve the practice and management of long-term care.

Penny Hollander Feldman, Robert L Kane

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Milbank quarterly, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
16.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Penny Hollander FeldmanVNSNY Center for Home Care Policy and Research, USA. pfeldman@vnsny.org
Robert L Kane
Visiting Nurse Service of New York · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Past investments in long-term care (LTC) research have improved the quality of care and the quality of life for LTC recipients by conceptualizing the goals and measuring the outcomes of care, designing practical assessment tools, testing clinical interventions, and evaluating new service delivery programs and models. To build a balanced portfolio of LTC research that will yield and sustain increased dividends in quality and outcomes will require (1) increasing investment in both basic and applied LTC research to ensure that critical service delivery issues are addressed in a rigorous and timely fashion, (2) fostering better communication between researchers and users to ensure research salience and credibility, and (3) dedicating more resources to identifying and implementing successful methods for translating LTC research into practice.

Indexed as

Health PlanningHealth Services ResearchHumansLong-Term CareNeeds AssessmentOrganizational InnovationOrganizational ObjectivesOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareProgram EvaluationUnited States

Identifiers

PMID12841048
PMCPMC2690214
OpenAlexW2169174584

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.