ArticleJournal of integrated care (Brighton, England)2018
An integrated care programme in London: qualitative evaluation.
Article in Journal of integrated care (Brighton, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Commonality of 25 component themes of integrated care for children: rapid review of 170 models.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Quality of integrated care for patients with multimorbidity in China: a Servqual Model analysis.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Integrated care in practice: lessons from three tiers of healthcare provider and commissioner staff in two London Integrated Care Systems.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Factors that influence inter-organisational integration: a qualitative exploration of service providers' perspectives from an integrated care initiative.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of New Reactivation Approaches in Integrated Long-Term Care-Contribution to the Long-Term Care Act.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- This needs to be a journey that we're actually on together'-the introduction of integrated care systems for children and young people in England: a qualitative study of the views of local system stakeholders during winter 2021/22.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Integrated Care ModelInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- How, when, and why do inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work? A realist evaluation.PloS one · 2022Article
- When trust, confidence, and faith collide: refining a realist theory of how and why inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work.BMC health services research · 2021Review
- Why do some inter-organisational collaborations in healthcare work when others do not? A realist review.Systematic reviews · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA well-funded, four-year integrated care programme was implemented in south London. The programme attempted to integrate care across primary, acute, community, mental health and social care. The purpose of this paper is to reduce hospital admissions and nursing home placements. Programme evaluation aimed to identify what worked well and what did not; lessons learnt; the value of integrated care investment. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Qualitative data were obtained from documentary analysis, stakeholder interviews, focus groups and observational data from programme meetings. Framework analysis was applied to stakeholder interview and focus group data in order to generate themes.
findingsThe integrated care project had not delivered expected radical reductions in hospital or nursing home utilisation. In response, the scheme was reformulated to focus on feasible service integration. Other benefits emerged, particularly system transformation. Nine themes emerged: shared vision/case for change; interventions; leadership; relationships; organisational structures and governance; citizens and patients; evaluation and monitoring; macro level. Each theme was interpreted in terms of "successes", "challenges" and "lessons learnt". RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Evaluation was hampered by lack of a clear evaluation strategy from programme inception to conclusion, and of the evidence required to corroborate claims of benefit. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Key lessons learnt included: importance of strong clinical leadership, shared ownership and inbuilt evaluation. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Primary care was a key player in the integrated care programme. Initial resistance delayed implementation and related to concerns about vertical integration and scepticism about unrealistic goals. A focus on clinical care and shared ownership contributed to eventual system transformation.
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.