ArticleLondon journal of primary care2017
New ways of working; delivering better care for people with long-term conditions.
Article in London journal of primary care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids from patients with COPD with mild or moderate airflow limitation in primary care: a feasibility randomised trial.BMJ open respiratory research · 2022Trial
- Challenges in Management of the Adult Vascular Anomalies Population: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Towards a strategic alignment of public health and primary care practices at local levels - the case of severe and enduring mental illness.London journal of primary care · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe cost-effectiveness of the traditional outpatient model for specialist care provision is increasingly being questioned in view of the changing patient needs, workforce challenges and technological advances.
settingThis report summarises two RCGP London events showcasing new ways of delivering care for long-term conditions. QUESTIONS: What are the alternative approaches to the traditional outpatient model and do they have common themes? What are the challenges and opportunities of these new models of care?
methodsPresentation of examples of new ways of long-term condition care delivery and round-table facilitative discussion and reflection on the challenges and solutions around service re-design and implementation, the commissioning and funding of new models of care, the facilitation of system-wide learning and the collection of data for evaluation.
resultsDifferent ways of delivering care for people with Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) were presented. Most of the interventions included virtual clinics (during which patient care was reviewed by a specialist remotely without the need for a face-to-face consultation), improved communication between primary and secondary care clinicians, an element of referral triage/prioritisation, the use of trigger tools to identify people at risk of deterioration, patient education and a multi-disciplinary approach. DISCUSSION-
conclusionsDifferent models to the traditional outpatient long-term condition care are feasible and can result in improvements in the quality of care and staff satisfaction. However, such initiatives require careful planning, close collaboration between health care professionals and allocation of appropriate resources and training within primary care. There is also a need for systematic evaluation of such pilots to assess their cost-effectiveness and their acceptability to clinicians and patients. This requires systematic collection of population level data, agreement on the key outcomes for evaluation and a commitment of all stakeholders to sharing learning and resources to enable continuous 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.