Competition in general practice.

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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Behavioural health consultants in integrated primary care teams: a model for future care.BMC family practice · 2016
   Article
2. Are New Zealand's new primary health organisations fit for purpose?BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006
   Article
3. Patients' perceptions and experiences of 'continuity of care' in diabetes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2006
   Article
4. A new direction for NHS community services.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006
   Article
5. The contribution of general practice and the general practitioner to NHS patients.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2006
   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

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as