ArticleLondon journal of primary care2014
How do rural patients benefit from the patient-centred medical home? A card study in the High Plains Research Network.
Article in London journal of primary care, 2014. 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.
- Care Practices to Promote Patient Engagement in VA Primary Care: Factors Associated With High Performance.Annals of family medicine · 2020Article
- Collaborating sites for community-oriented integrated care and health promotion.London journal of primary care · 2017Article
- The Patient and Patient-Centered Medical Homes.Journal of general internal medicine · 2016Article
- Designing and Implementing an Electronic Health Record-Embedded Card Study in Primary Care: Methods and Considerations.Annals of family medicineArticle
- Patient-Centered Medical Homes: How the Federally Supported Model Minimizes Healthcare Access Disparities for Older Adults in Rural Areas.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context The patient-centred medical home (PCMH) has become a dominant model for improving the quality and cost of primary care. Geographic isolation, small populations, privacy concerns and staffing requirements may limit implementation of the PCMH in clinical practice. Objective To determine the primary care provider perceived benefit of PCMH for patients in rural Colorado. Design, setting and participants The High Plains Research Network (HPRN) is a community and practice-based research network spanning 30 000 square miles in 16 counties in eastern Colorado. The HPRN consists of 58 practices, 120 primary care clinicians and 145 000 residents. Main outcome measures Providers' perceived benefit of PCMH for individual patients. Results Seventy-eight providers in 37 practices saw 1093 patients and completed 1016 surveys. There was wide variation among the provider-perceived benefits of PCMH elements ranging from 9% for group visits to 64% for electronic prescribing. Provider-perceived benefit was higher for patients with a chronic medical condition. Conclusions Rural primary care providers perceived patient benefit for numerous elements of the PCMH. There is need to consider what PCMH elements may be required in practice and what components might be optional. Our findings reveal that rural practices share PCMH aspirations including commitment to quality, safety, outcomes, cost reduction, and patient and provider satisfaction. These findings support the need for ongoing conversation about how to best provide a locally relevant medical home.
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.