ArticleBMC family practice2010
Priority setting in primary health care - dilemmas and opportunities: a focus group study.
Article in BMC family practice, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Underlying mechanisms of complex interventions addressing the care of older adults with multimorbidity: a realist review.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- What is important, what needs treating? How GPs perceive older patients' multiple health problems: a mixed method research study.BMC research notes · 2012Trial
- Needs assessment in long-term care: expression of national principles for priority setting in service allocation.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Missed Nursing Care; Prioritizing the Patient's Needs: An Umbrella Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- How health care professionals handle limited resources in primary care - an interview study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Priorities for family physician and general practitioner recruitment and retention in Singapore: a PRIORITIZE study.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Finding common (research) ground between general practitioners and neuroscientists: the vital role of knowledge circulation in closing the evidence-to-practice gap.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Personal responsibility for health? A phenomenographic analysis of general practitioners' conceptions.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2021Article
- Priority Setting in the Polish Health Care System According to Patients' Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Legitimacy of work tasks, psychosocial work environment, and time utilization among primary care staff in Sweden.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Time utilization and perceived psychosocial work environment among staff in Swedish primary care settings.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Article
- Public engagement in setting healthcare priorities: a ranking exercise in Cyprus.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2017Article
- Rationing is a reality in rural physiotherapy: a qualitative exploration of service level decision-making.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- Increased fairness in priority setting processes within the health sector: the case of Kapiri-Mposhi District, Zambia.BMC health services research · 2014Article
- Linking patient satisfaction with nursing care: the case of care rationing - a correlational study.BMC nursing · 2014Article
- Priority setting in health care: trends and models from Scandinavian experiences.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2013Article
- Setting priorities in primary health care--on whose conditions? A questionnaire study.BMC family practice · 2012Article
- Is patient-centered care the same as person-focused care?The Permanente journal · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSwedish health care authorities use three key criteria to produce national guidelines for local priority setting: severity of the health condition, expected patient benefit, and cost-effectiveness of medical intervention. Priority setting in primary health care (PHC) has significant implications for health costs and outcomes in the health care system. Nevertheless, these guidelines have been implemented to a very limited degree in PHC. The objective of the study was to qualitatively assess how general practitioners (GPs) and nurses perceive the application of the three key priority-setting criteria.
methodsFocus groups were held with GPs and nurses at primary health care centres, where the staff had a short period of experience in using the criteria for prioritising in their daily work.
resultsThe staff found the three key priority-setting criteria (severity, patient benefit, and cost-effectiveness) to be valuable for priority setting in PHC. However, when the criteria were applied in PHC, three additional dimensions were identified: 1) viewpoint (medical or patient's), 2) timeframe (now or later), and 3) evidence level (group or individual).
conclusionsThe three key priority-setting criteria were useful. Considering the three additional dimensions might enhance implementation of national guidelines in PHC and is probably a prerequisite for the criteria to be useful in priority setting for individual patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.