ReviewAtencion primaria2011
[Documental review of community health promotion experiences in primary health care].
Review in Atencion primaria, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increasing community orientation of primary care health professionals: analysis of the training plan of a community health strategy.BMC primary care · 2026Observational
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practice of primary care professionals regarding community activities: a descriptive study.Family practice · 2025Article
- Factors related to the development of health-promoting community activities in Spanish primary healthcare: two caseBMJ open · 2017Article
- Article
- Article
- Community Activities in Primary Care: A Literature Review.Journal of primary care & community healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDescribe the community activities (CA) published or registered in health promotion networks in which Primary Health Care (PHC) has taken part.
designDescriptive study, by documental review of experiences. DATA SOURCE: articles, activities in exchange networks, presentations and funded projects. SELECTED EXPERIENCES: The AC included were those where PHC and the local community were involved in its inception, development and/or evaluation, but not solitary actions with no continuity. DATA EXTRACTION: The following variables were collected: Source and year of the document; region; municipality; name and number of health centres involved; target population; objectives; involvement of the community, the health and the non-health sectors; theoretical perspective and evaluation methods.
resultsA total of 472 activities were found that met criteria, involving 300 health centres in most of the autonomous regions. Of those, 71.8% were registered in networks, and 19.3% were registered in articles. The most frequent target populations were: the general population (22.2%), youth (18.2%) and parents (10.2%). More than half (58.2%) had one or more of the following objectives: to empower the community to choose healthy behaviours; transmit health information to the population, or encourage self-care. In 33.3% of the activities there were no other sectors involved besides Primary Care. Of the remainder, non-health sectors participated in 53.8%, civic bodies in 26.9%, and government administration in 24.2%.
conclusionsMost of the CA are documented in networks and their presence is uneven by region. The involvement of sectors other than PHC in the activities identified is low.
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.