Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18681977›Full record

SynthesisBMC family practice2008

Multidisciplinary care planning in the primary care management of completed stroke: a systematic review.

Geoffrey K Mitchell, Robyn M Brown, Lars Erikssen, Jennifer J Tieman

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Integrated care programmes for adults with chronic conditions: a meta-review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Interface, interaction and integration: how people with chronic disease in Australia manage CAM and conventional medical services.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Geoffrey K MitchellDiscipline of General Practice, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. g.mitchell@uq.edu.au
Robyn M Brown
Lars Erikssen
Jennifer J Tieman
University of Queensland · AUFlinders University · AUQueensland Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic disease management requires input from multiple health professionals, both specialist and primary care providers. This study sought to assess the impact of co-ordinated multidisciplinary care in primary care, represented by the delivery of formal care planning by primary care teams or shared across primary-secondary teams, on outcomes in stroke, relative to usual care.

methodsA Systematic review of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL (all 1990-2006), Cochrane Library (Issue 1 2006), and grey literature from web based searching of web sites listed in the CCOHA Health Technology Assessment List Analysis used narrative analysis of findings of randomised and non-randomised trials, and observational and qualitative studies of patients with completed stroke in the primary care setting where care planning was undertaken by 1) a multi-disciplinary primary care team or 2) through shared care by primary and secondary providers.

resultsOne thousand and forty-five citations were retrieved. Eighteen papers were included for analysis. Most care planning took part in the context of multidisciplinary team care based in hospitals with outreach to community patients. Mortality rates are not impacted by multidisciplinary care planning. Functional outcomes of the studies were inconsistent. It is uncertain whether the active engagement of GPs and other primary care professionals in the multidisciplinary care planning contributed to the outcomes in the studies showing a positive effect. There may be process benefits from multidisciplinary care planning that includes primary care professionals and GPs. Few studies actually described the tasks and roles GPs fulfilled and whether this matched what was presumed to be provided.

conclusionWhile multidisciplinary care planning may not unequivocally improve the care of patients with completed stroke, there may be process benefits such as improved task allocation between providers. Further study on the impact of active GP involvement in multidisciplinary care planning is warranted.

Indexed as

Patient Care TeamFamily PracticeHumansPatient Care PlanningPrimary Health CareStroke

Identifiers

PMID18681977
PMCPMC2518150
OpenAlexW2105223241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.