Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25951820›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2015

The effectiveness of interventions to achieve co-ordinated multidisciplinary care and reduce hospital use for people with chronic diseases: study protocol for a systematic review of reviews.

Sarah Damery, Sarah Flanagan, Gill Combes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Impact of Complex Quality-Interventions on Patient Outcome: A Systematic Overview of Systematic Reviews.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
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.

Sarah DamerySchool of Health and Population Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. s.l.damery@bham.ac.uk.
Sarah FlanaganSchool of Health and Population Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. s.m.flanagan@bham.ac.uk.
Gill CombesSchool of Health and Population Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. g.combes@bham.ac.uk.

Funding

Department of Health WMCLAHRC-2014-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe burden of chronic disease on patients and the health service is growing. Current health policy emphasises the need for services which provide integrated and co-ordinated care for patients with chronic diseases, but there is uncertainty about which integrated care interventions and service models may be most effective. This review of reviews aims to synthesise the available evidence about the effectiveness of such interventions and service models in terms of patient experience of health and social care, the use of hospital and other health resources, and the associated costs. METHODS/

designWe will search MEDLINE, Embase, ASSIA, PsycINFO, HMIC, CINAHL, Cochrane Library (including HTA Database, DARE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), EPPI-Centre, TRIP, and Health Economic Evaluations databases for English language systematic reviews and meta-analyses published since 2000 that have evaluated the effectiveness of integrated care interventions for patients with chronic diseases. Interventions must deliver care that crosses the boundary between at least two health and/or social care settings. Outcomes of interest are healthcare resource use, patient quality of life/satisfaction, costs, and care co-ordination. Data from eligible reviews will be extracted by two independent reviewers and will include study details, the design, delivery and co-ordination of interventions, and methodological quality. Evidence synthesis will focus on a narrative overview of interventions and their effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The review aims to summarise the evidence base about the effectiveness of integrated care interventions and service models and describe how interventions have been organised, co-ordinated, and delivered. The findings have the potential to impact on the commissioning of health and social care services in the UK which aim to provide integrated and co-ordinated care for patients with chronic disease and multimorbidity. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015016458 .

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareHealth ServicesHospitalizationHospitalsPatient Care TeamChronic DiseaseClinical ProtocolsHumansResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID25951820
PMCPMC4429832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.