SynthesisPloS one2014
Can team-based care improve patient satisfaction? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interprofessional Education: Current State in Psychology Training.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2022Pooled it
- Nurse Practitioner-Physician Comanagement: A Theoretical Model to Alleviate Primary Care Strain.Annals of family medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Improved patient-reported outcomes after interprofessional training in mental health: a nonrandomized intervention study.BMC psychiatry · 2020Trial
- Does a complex intervention increase patient knowledge about oral anticoagulation? - a cluster-randomised controlled trial.BMC family practice · 2017Trial
- Sharing Responsibilities within the General Practice Team - A Cross-Sectional Study of Task Delegation in Germany.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Who are the healthcare professionals involved in interprofessional team meetings in French multidisciplinary primary care centres? A quantitative analysis of eight centres.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Diabetic Patients' Experiences in Primary Healthcare Centers in the Al-Ahsa Region, 2025.Cureus · 2025Article
- A Tale of Two Institutions: Implementing IPE Curricula and Assessment Tools.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Unveiling the veil: Exploring experiences of patient-initiated workplace violence in long-term care and mental health and substance use settings.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Alström syndrome: the journey to diagnosis.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Perspective on Advancing Health Equity: Enhancing Impact Through Collaboration.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Measuring the Impact of Primary Care Team Composition on Patient Activation Utilizing Electronic Health Record Big Data Analytics.Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2024Article
- Integrated care teams in primary care improve clinical outcomes and care processes in patients with non-communicable diseases.Singapore medical journal · 2023Article
- Article
- Addressing Hypertension Outcomes Using Telehealth and Population Health Managers: Adaptations and Implementation Considerations.Current hypertension reports · 2022Review
- Mental health care integration and primary care patient experience in the Veterans Health Administration.Healthcare (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Optimal staffing in community health centers to improve quality of care.Health services research · 2021Article
- Assessing Association Between Team Structure and Health Outcome and Cost by Social Network Analysis.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2020Article
- Team-based primary health care for non-communicable diseases: complexities in South India.Health policy and planning · 2020Article
- Multidisciplinary aortopathy clinics: A systematic scoping review of the literature and evaluation of patient experiences from a newly started clinic in Norway.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTeam-based approaches to patient care are a relatively recent innovation in health care delivery. The effectiveness of these approaches on patient outcomes has not been well documented. This paper reports a systematic review of the relationship between team-based care and patient satisfaction.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PSYCHOINFO for eligible studies dating from inception to October 8, 2012. Eligible studies reported (1) a randomized controlled trial, (2) interventions including both team-based care and non-team-based care (or usual care), and (3) outcomes including an assessment of patient satisfaction. Articles with different settings between intervention and control were excluded, as were trial protocols. The reference lists of retrieved papers were also evaluated for inclusion.
resultsThe literature search yielded 319 citations, of which 77 were screened for further full-text evaluation. Of these, 27 articles were included in the systematic review. The 26 trials with a total of 15,526 participants were included in this systematic review. The pooling result of dichotomous data (number of studies: 10) showed that team-based care had a positive effect on patient satisfaction compared with usual care (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.54 to 2.84); however, combined continuous data (number of studies: 7) demonstrated that there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between team-based care and usual care (standardized mean difference, -0.02; 95% confidence interval, -0.40 to 0.36).
conclusionsSome evidence showed that team-based care is better than usual care in improving patient satisfaction. However, considering the pooling result of continuous data, along with the suboptimal quality of included trials, further large-scale and high-quality randomized controlled trials comparing team-based care and usual care are needed.
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.