ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2016
Academic family health teams: Part 1: patient perceptions of core primary care domains.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organizational attributes of interprofessional primary care for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities in ontario, Canada: a multiple case study.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Article
- Ten years of the Primary Care Assessment Tool inCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021Article
- Family and community guidance in adolescence: assessment in the family health strategy.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2021Article
- Prioritizing coordination of primary health care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2020Article
- Article
- Evaluating the implementation of collaborative teams in community family practice using the Primary Care Assessment Tool.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Article
- Patient Input in Regional Healthcare Planning-A Meaningful Contribution.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Academic family health teams: Part 2: patient perceptions of access.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore patients' perceptions of primary care (PC) in the early development of academic family health teams (aFHTs)--interprofessional PC teams delivering care where family medicine and other health professional learners are trained--focusing on the 4 core domains of PC.
designSelf-administered survey using the Primary Care Assessment Tool Adult Expanded Version (PCAT), which addresses 4 core domains of PC (first contact, continuity, comprehensiveness, and coordination). The PCAT uses a 4-point Likert scale (from definitely not to definitely) to capture patients' responses about the occurrence of components of care.
settingSix aFHTs in Ontario.
participantsAdult patients attending appointments and administrators at each of the aFHTs.
main outcome measuresMean PCAT domain scores, with a score of 3 chosen as the minimum expected level of care. Multivariate log binomial regression models were used to estimate the adjusted relative risks of PCAT score levels as functions of patient- and clinic-level characteristics.
resultsThe response rate was 47.3% (1026 of 2167). The mean age of respondents was 49.6 years, and most respondents were female (71.6%). The overall PC score (2.92) was just below the minimum expected care level. Scores for first contact (2.28 [accessibility]), coordination of information systems (2.67), and comprehensiveness of care (2.83 [service available] and 2.36 [service provided]) were below the minimum. Findings suggest some patient groups might not be optimally served by aFHTs, particularly recent immigrants. Characteristics of aFHTs, including a large number of physicians, were not associated with high performance on PC domains. Distributed practices across multiple sites were negatively associated with high performance for some domains. The presence of electronic medical records was not associated with improved performance on coordination of information systems.
conclusionPatients of these aFHTs rated several core domains of PC highly, but results indicate room for improvement in several domains, particularly first-contact accessibility. A future study will determine what changes were implemented in these aFHTs and if patient ratings have improved. This reflective process is essential to ensuring that aFHTs provide effective models of PC to learners of all disciplines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27331228PMC4721857What 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.