Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26212845›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2015

Quality care provision for older people: an interview study with patients and primary healthcare professionals.

Marjolein Helena Johanna van de Pol, Cornelia Rita Maria Gertruda Fluit, Joep Lagro, Danielle Niessen, Marcellinus Gerardus Maria Olde Rikkert, Antoinette Leonarda Maria Lagro-Janssen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Marjolein Helena Johanna van de PolDepartment of Primary and Community Care;
Cornelia Rita Maria Gertruda FluitHead of the Academic Educational Institute, Academic Educational Institute;
Joep LagroDepartment of Internal Medicine, Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Danielle NiessenElderly Care, Elderly care organization 'De Zorggroep', Venlo, the Netherlands.
Marcellinus Gerardus Maria Olde RikkertDepartment of Geriatrics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Antoinette Leonarda Maria Lagro-JanssenDepartment of Primary and Community Care;

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years, primary health care for the ageing population has become increasingly complex.

aimThis study sought to explore the views and needs of healthcare professionals and older patients relating to primary care in order to identify focal areas for improving primary health care for older people. DESIGN AND

settingThis research was structured as a mixed interview study with focus groups and individual interviews. Participants were made up of primary healthcare professionals and older patients. Patients were recruited from five elderly care homes in a small city in the southern part of the Netherlands.

methodAll interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed by two individual researchers applying constant comparative analysis. Data collection proceeded until saturation was reached.

resultsParticipants in the study agreed about the need for primary care for older patients, and showed sympathy with one another's perspectives. They did note, however, a number of obstacles hindering good healthcare provision. The major themes that arose were: 'autonomy and independence', 'organisational barriers', and 'professional expertise'. Participants generally noted that it is important to clarify differences in perspectives about good care between patients and healthcare professionals.

conclusionEffective primary care intervention for older patients requires mutual understanding of the expectations and goals of all parties involved. There are a number of important requirements, especially accessible patient information in the form of care plans; specialist training for nurses and GPs on complex care and multimorbidity; and training on discussing autonomy, goal setting, and shared care. Further improvement in health care for older people and its evaluation research should focus on these requirements.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude of Health PersonnelCooperative BehaviorFemaleFocus GroupsFrail ElderlyGeriatric AssessmentHealth PersonnelHealth Services for the AgedHumansInterviews as TopicMaleNeeds AssessmentNetherlandscare homesfocus groupshealth services for older peoplepatient-centred careprimary care

Identifiers

PMID26212845
PMCPMC4513737

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.