ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2013
Improving collaboration between public health and family health teams in Ontario.
Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid evidence review: Policy actions for the integration of public health and health care in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- The role of registered nurses in primary care and public health collaboration: A scoping review.Nursing open · 2020Article
- Imaging use for low back pain by Ontario primary care clinicians: protocol for a mixed methods study - the Back ON study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Article
- Improving health equity: the promising role of community health workers in Canada.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2014Article
- The Role of Primary Care in a Pandemic: Reflections During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canada.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify and explore areas where responsibilities may overlap between family health teams (FHTs) and public health units (PHUs); to identify facilitators or barriers to collaboration; and to identify priority areas for increased collaboration. DESIGN AND CONTEXT: Cross-sectional mixed-methods study of FHTs and PHUs in Ontario, Canada, consisting of a postal survey, key informant interviews and a roundtable meeting.
resultsThe survey response rate was 46%. Direct client-based services such as giving immunizations, promoting prenatal health and nutrition, and counselling related to smoking cessation were identified as the top three areas of perceived overlap. The greatest interest in collaboration was expressed in the areas of emergency planning and preparedness, immunization, and prenatal health and nutrition. Good communication with a clear understanding of roles and functions was the most important facilitator, and lack of resources and absence of a clear provincial mandate and direction to collaborate were identified as significant barriers.
conclusionsSmall, simple client-based projects of interest to both kinds of organization would be the best way to move forward in the short term. Improving communication between FHTs and PHUs, understanding of roles and functions, the use of shared or interoperable information systems and greater clarity from government on the ways in which these two key sectors of the healthcare system are intended to work together were identified as important for the success of increased collaboration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23968630PMC3999554W1970453959What 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.