ArticleBMJ open2015
Integrated Primary Care Teams (IPCT) pilot project in Quebec: a protocol paper.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommendations of an Independent Expert Committee for the Development of Quebec's First Government Policy on Primary Care.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- Pre-post analysis of the impact of British Columbia nurse practitioner primary care clinics on patient health and care experience.BMJ open · 2023Article
- How to measure the collective intelligence of primary healthcare teams?Learning health systems · 2020Article
- Complexity as a factor for task allocation among general practitioners and nurse practitioners: a narrative review.BMC family practice · 2020Review
- Formalisation and subordination: a contingency theory approach to optimising primary care teams.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Analytical typology of multiprofessional primary care models.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Rethinking Primary Care Delivery Models: Can Integrated Primary Care Teams Improve Care Experience?International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe overall aim of this project is to help develop knowledge about primary care delivery models likely to improve the accessibility, quality and efficiency of care. Operationally, this objective will be achieved through supporting and evaluating 8 primary care team pilot sites that rely on an expanded nursing role within a more intensive team-based, interdisciplinary setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The first research component is aimed at supporting the development and implementation of the pilot projects, and is divided into 2 parts. The first part is a logical analysis based on interpreting available scientific data to understand the causal processes by which the objectives of the intervention being studied may be achieved. The second part is a developmental evaluation to support teams in the field in a participatory manner and thereby learn from experience. Operationally, the developmental evaluation phase mainly involves semistructured interviews. The second component of the project design focuses on evaluating pilot project results and assessing their costs. This component is in turn made up of 2 parts. Part 1 is a pre-and-post survey of patients receiving the intervention care to analyse their care experience. In part 2, each patient enrolled in part 1 (around 4000 patients) will be matched with 2 patients followed within a traditional primary care model, so that a comparative analysis of the accessibility, quality and efficiency of the intervention can be performed. The cohorts formed in this way will be followed longitudinally for 4 years. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project, as well as all consent forms and research tools, have been accepted by 2 health sciences research ethics committees. The procedures used will conform to best practices regarding the anonymity of patients.
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.