ReviewIrish journal of medical science2015
Primary care teams in Ireland: a qualitative mapping review of Irish grey and published literature.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Enhancing Nutrition Care in Primary Healthcare: Exploring Practices, Barriers, and Multidisciplinary Solutions in Ireland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Barriers and Facilitators.International journal of integrated care · 2021Article
- Managing frailty in an Irish primary care setting: A qualitative study of perspectives of healthcare professionals and frail older patients.Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls · 2021Article
- Implementing community participation via interdisciplinary teams in primary care: An Irish case study in practice.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Article
- Do primary care professionals agree about progress with implementation of primary care teams: results from a cross sectional study.BMC family practice · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe Irish government published its primary care strategy, Primary Care: A New Direction in 2001. Progress with the implementation of Primary care teams is modest. The aim of this paper is to map the Irish grey literature and peer-reviewed publications to determine what research has been carried out in relation to primary care teams, the reform process and interdisciplinary working in primary care in Ireland.
methodsThis scoping review employed three methods: a review of Web of Science, Medline and Embase databases, an email survey of researchers across academic institutions, the HSE and independent researchers and a review of Lenus and the Health Well repository.
resultsN = 123 outputs were identified. N = 14 were selected for inclusion. A thematic analysis was undertaken. Common themes identified were resources, GP participation, leadership, clarity regarding roles in primary care teams, skills and knowledge for primary care team working, communication and community.
conclusionThere is evidence of significant problems that disrupt team formation and functioning that warrants more comprehensive research.
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.