Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30765411›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2019

How is patient-centred care addressed in women's health? A theoretical rapid review.

Anna R Gagliardi, Sheila Dunn, Angel Foster, Sherry L Grace, Courtney R Green, Nazilla Khanlou, Fiona A Miller, Donna E Stewart, Simone Vigod, Frances C Wright

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. How is patient-centred care conceptualized in obstetrical health? comparison of themes from concept analyses in obstetrical health- and patient-centred care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Anna R GagliardiToronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sheila DunnWomen's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Angel FosterFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Sherry L GraceToronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7063-3610
Courtney R GreenSociety of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Nazilla KhanlouSociety of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Fiona A MillerInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Donna E StewartToronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Simone VigodWomen's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Frances C WrightLouise Temerty Breast Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University Health Network · CAWomen's College Hospital · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAThe Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CAUniversity of Toronto · CAYork University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEfforts are needed to reduce gendered inequities and improve health and well-being for women. Patient-centred care (PCC), an approach that informs and engages patients in their own health, is positively associated with improved care delivery, experiences and outcomes. This study aimed to describe how PCC for women (PCCW) has been conceptualised in research.

methodsWe conducted a theoretical rapid review of PCCW in four health conditions. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs index for English-language articles published from January 2008 to February 2018 inclusive that investigated PCC and involved at least 50% women aged 18 or older. We analysed findings using a six-domain PCC framework, and reported findings with summary statistics and narrative descriptions.

resultsAfter screening 2872 unique search results, we reviewed 51 full-text articles, and included 14 (five family planning, three preventive care, four depression, one cardiovascular disease and one rehabilitation). Studies varied in how they assessed PCC. None examined all six PCC framework domains; least evaluated domains were addressing emotions, managing uncertainty and enabling self-management. Seven studies that investigated PCC outcomes found a positive association with appropriate health service use, disease remission, health self-efficacy and satisfaction with care. Differing views about PCC between patients and physicians, physician PCC attitudes and geographic affluence influenced PCC. No studies evaluated the influence of patient characteristics or tested interventions to support PCCW.

conclusionThere is a paucity of research that has explored or evaluated PCCW in the conditions of interest. We excluded many studies because they arbitrarily labelled many topics as PCC, or simply concluded that PCC was needed. More research is needed to fully conceptualise and describe PCCW across different characteristics and conditions, and to test interventions that improve PCCW. Policies and incentives may also be needed to stimulate greater awareness and delivery of PCCW.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansPatient-Centered CareWomen's Health Servicesdeterminantsequityinterventionsoutcomespoliciesquality

Identifiers

PMID30765411
PMCPMC6398665
OpenAlexW2914000449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.