Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20979612›Full record

SynthesisBMC family practice2010

The European primary care monitor: structure, process and outcome indicators.

Dionne S Kringos, Wienke G W Boerma, Yann Bourgueil, Thomas Cartier, Toralf Hasvold, Allen Hutchinson, Margus Lember, Marek Oleszczyk, Danica Rotar Pavlic, Igor Svab and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 96 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
19.5field-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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 265 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. What makes a good quality indicator set? A systematic review of criteria.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Multicomponent interventions for enhancing primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

15 authors at 11 institutions in 10 countries.

Dionne S KringosNIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, Netherlands. d.kringos@nivel.nl
Wienke G W Boerma
Yann Bourgueil
Thomas Cartier
Toralf Hasvold
Allen Hutchinson
Margus Lember
Marek Oleszczyk
Danica Rotar Pavlic
Igor Svab
Paolo Tedeschi
Andrew Wilson
Adam Windak
Toni Dedeu
Stefan Wilm
Institut de Recherche et de Documentation en Économie de la Santé · FRJagiellonian University · PLNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLUniversity of Ljubljana · SIBocconi University · ITInstitut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol · ESUiT The Arctic University of Norway · NOUniversity of Leicester · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GBUniversity of Tartu · EEWitten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScientific research has provided evidence on benefits of well developed primary care systems. The relevance of some of this research for the European situation is limited.There is currently a lack of up to date comprehensive and comparable information on variation in development of primary care, and a lack of knowledge of structures and strategies conducive to strengthening primary care in Europe. The EC funded project Primary Health Care Activity Monitor for Europe (PHAMEU) aims to fill this gap by developing a Primary Care Monitoring System (PC Monitor) for application in 31 European countries. This article describes the development of the indicators of the PC Monitor, which will make it possible to create an alternative model for holistic analyses of primary care.

methodsA systematic review of the primary care literature published between 2003 and July 2008 was carried out. This resulted in an overview of: (1) the dimensions of primary care and their relevance to outcomes at (primary) health system level; (2) essential features per dimension; (3) applied indicators to measure the features of primary care dimensions. The indicators were evaluated by the project team against criteria of relevance, precision, flexibility, and discriminating power. The resulting indicator set was evaluated on its suitability for Europe-wide comparison of primary care systems by a panel of primary care experts from various European countries (representing a variety of primary care systems).

resultsThe developed PC Monitor approaches primary care in Europe as a multidimensional concept. It describes the key dimensions of primary care systems at three levels: structure, process, and outcome level. On structure level, it includes indicators for governance, economic conditions, and workforce development. On process level, indicators describe access, comprehensiveness, continuity, and coordination of primary care services. On outcome level, indicators reflect the quality, and efficiency of primary care.

conclusionsA standardized instrument for describing and comparing primary care systems has been developed based on scientific evidence and consensus among an international panel of experts, which will be tested to all configurations of primary care in Europe, intended for producing comparable information. Widespread use of the instrument has the potential to improve the understanding of primary care delivery in different national contexts and thus to create opportunities for better decision making.

Indexed as

Quality Indicators, Health CareEuropeHumansOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID20979612
PMCPMC2975652
OpenAlexW2134586383

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.