Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24445105›Full record

ReviewAnnals of family medicine

Systems and complexity thinking in the general practice literature: an integrative, historical narrative review.

Joachim P Sturmberg, Carmel M Martin, David A Katerndahl

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
23.8field-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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 135 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Systemic path to global health 2050.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Primary health care strengthening through the lens of healthcare system thinking.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Joachim P SturmbergDepartment of General Practice, Newcastle University, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
Carmel M Martin
David A Katerndahl
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USTrinity College Dublin · IEUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeOver the past 7 decades, theories in the systems and complexity sciences have had a major influence on academic thinking and research. We assessed the impact of complexity science on general practice/family medicine.

methodsWe performed a historical integrative review using the following systematic search strategy: medical subject heading [humans] combined in turn with the terms complex adaptive systems, nonlinear dynamics, systems biology, and systems theory, limited to general practice/family medicine and published before December 2010. A total of 16,242 articles were retrieved, of which 49 were published in general practice/family medicine journals. Hand searches and snowballing retrieved another 35. After a full-text review, we included 56 articles dealing specifically with systems sciences and general/family practice.

resultsGeneral practice/family medicine engaged with the emerging systems and complexity theories in 4 stages. Before 1995, articles tended to explore common phenomenologic general practice/family medicine experiences. Between 1995 and 2000, articles described the complex adaptive nature of this discipline. Those published between 2000 and 2005 focused on describing the system dynamics of medical practice. After 2005, articles increasingly applied the breadth of complex science theories to health care, health care reform, and the future of medicine.

conclusionsThis historical review describes the development of general practice/family medicine in relation to complex adaptive systems theories, and shows how systems sciences more accurately reflect the discipline's philosophy and identity. Analysis suggests that general practice/family medicine first embraced systems theories through conscious reorganization of its boundaries and scope, before applying empirical tools. Future research should concentrate on applying nonlinear dynamics and empirical modeling to patient care, and to organizing and developing local practices, engaging in community development, and influencing health care reform.

Indexed as

Nonlinear DynamicsSystems BiologySystems TheoryFamily PracticeGeneral PracticeHumansResearchcomplex adaptive systemsfamily medicinegeneral practicehistorical reviewintegrative reviewnonlinear dynamicsphilosophy of general practicephilosophy of medicinesystems biologysystems theory

Identifiers

PMID24445105
PMCPMC3896540
OpenAlexW2135681802

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.