ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2017
Optimising the community-based approach to healthcare improvement: Comparative case studies of the clinical community model in practice.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-creating community engagement and involvement strategies: understanding challenges and needs of people living with multiple long-term conditions and stakeholders' perspectives in India and Nepal.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- The AFFIRM Framework for gender-affirming care: qualitative findings from the Transgender and Gender Diverse Health Equity Study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Curricular Interventions in Medical Schools: Maximizing Community Engagement Through Communities of Practice.Annals of family medicine · 2023Article
- What Does a Systems Approach to Quality Improvement Look Like in Practice?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Essential health services delivery in South Africa during COVID-19: Community and healthcare worker perspectives.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Self-care can be an alternative to expand access to universal health care: What policy makers, governments and implementers can consider for South Africa.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2022Article
- The Triage Stalemate During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Losing Fairness to Ethical Paralysis.Critical care medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- Saturdays-in-Motion: Education and Empowerment through an Interdisciplinary Team Approach for Parkinson's Disease in Cali-Colombia.Parkinson's disease · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Translation of a community palliative care intervention: Experience from West Bengal, India.Wellcome open research · 2018Article
- Healthcare professionals' views of the enhanced recovery after surgery programme: a qualitative investigation.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Strengthening Primary Care Through Project ECHOJournal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Community-based approaches to healthcare improvement are receiving increasing attention. Such approaches could offer an infrastructure for efficient knowledge-sharing and a potent means of influencing behaviours, but their potential is yet to be optimised. After briefly reviewing challenges to community-based approaches, we describe in detail the clinical community model. Through exploring clinical communities in practice, we seek to identify practical lessons for optimising this community-based approach to healthcare improvement. Through comparative case studies based on secondary analysis, we examine two contrasting examples of clinical communities in practice - the USA-based Michigan Keystone ICU programme, and the UK-based Improving Lung Cancer Outcomes Project. We focus on three main issues. First, both cases were successful in mobilising diverse communities: favourable starting conditions, core teams with personal credibility, reputable institutional backing and embeddedness in wider networks were important. Second, top-down input to organise regular meetings, minimise conflict and empower those at risk of marginalisation helped establish a strong sense of community and reciprocal ties, while intervention components and measures common to the whole community strengthened peer-norming effects. Third, to drive implementation, technical expertise and responsiveness from the core team were important, but so too were 'hard tactics' (e.g. strict limits on local customisation); these were more easily deployed where the intervention was standardised across the community and a strong evidence-base existed. Contrary to the idea of self-organising communities, our cases make clear that vertical and horizontal forces depend on each other synergistically for their effectiveness. We offer practical lessons for establishing an effective balance of horizontal and vertical influences, and for identifying the types of quality problems most amenable to community-based improvement.
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.