Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23205042›Full record

ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2011

Comprehensiveness of care from the patient perspective: comparison of primary healthcare evaluation instruments.

Jeannie L Haggerty, Marie-Dominique Beaulieu, Raynald Pineault, Frederick Burge, Jean-Frédéric Lévesque, Darcy A Santor, Fatima Bouharaoui, Christine Beaulieu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Shared Decision Making in Perinatal Care.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Primary Care Networks and Starfield's 4Cs: A Case for Enhanced Chronic Disease Management.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

8 authors.

Jeannie L HaggertyDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Marie-Dominique Beaulieu
Raynald Pineault
Frederick Burge
Jean-Frédéric Lévesque
Darcy A Santor
Fatima Bouharaoui
Christine Beaulieu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledComprehensiveness relates both to scope of services offered and to a whole-person clinical approach. Comprehensive services are defined as "the provision, either directly or indirectly, of a full range of services to meet most patients' healthcare needs"; whole-person care is "the extent to which a provider elicits and considers the physical, emotional and social aspects of a patient's health and considers the community context in their care." Among instruments that evaluate primary healthcare, two had subscales that mapped to comprehensive services and to the community component of whole-person care: the Primary Care Assessment Tool - Short Form (PCAT-S) and the Components of Primary Care Index (CPCI, a limited measure of whole-person care).

objectiveTo examine how well comprehensiveness is captured in validated instruments that evaluate primary healthcare from the patient's perspective.

method645 adults with at least one healthcare contact in the previous 12 months responded to six instruments that evaluate primary healthcare. Scores were normalized for descriptive comparison. Exploratory and confirmatory (structural equation modelling) factor analysis examined fit to operational definition, and item response theory analysis examined item performance on common constructs.

resultsOver one-quarter of respondents had missing responses on services offered or doctor's knowledge of the community. The subscales did not load on a single factor; comprehensive services and community orientation were examined separately. The community orientation subscales did not perform satisfactorily. The three comprehensive services subscales fit very modestly onto two factors: (1) most healthcare needs (from one provider) (CPCI Comprehensive Care, PCAT-S First-Contact Utilization) and (2) range of services (PCAT-S Comprehensive Services Available). Individual item performance revealed several problems.

conclusionMeasurement of comprehensiveness is problematic, making this attribute a priority for measure development. Range of services offered is best obtained from providers. Whole-person care is not addressed as a separate construct, but some dimensions are covered by attributes such as interpersonal communication and relational continuity.

Identifiers

PMID23205042
PMCPMC3399439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.