Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30845968›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2019

How have researchers defined and used the concept of 'continuity of care' for chronic conditions in the context of resource-constrained settings? A scoping review of existing literature and a proposed conceptual framework.

Lana Meiqari, Tammam Al-Oudat, Dirk Essink, Fedde Scheele, Pamela Wright

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Empowering outpatients with breast cancer: The impact of a Continuous Care Program on self-efficacy-a randomized clinical trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. A National Survey Comparing Patients' and Transplant Professionals' Research Priorities in the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

5 authors.

Lana MeiqariAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. lana.meiqari@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9348-4830
Tammam Al-OudatMédecins Sans Frontières, Operational Centre Geneva (MSF-OCG), Geneva, Switzerland.
Dirk EssinkAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Fedde ScheeleAthena Institute for Research on Innovation and Communication in Health and Life Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pamela WrightGuelph International Health Consulting, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Fellowship Specific Grant Agreement 2014-0681
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the context of the growing burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) globally, there is limited evidence on how researchers have explored the response to chronic health needs in the context of health policy and systems in low- and middle-income countries. Continuity of care (CoC) is one concept that represents several elements of a long-term model of care. This scoping review aims to map and describe the state of knowledge regarding how researchers in resource-constrained settings have defined and used the concept of CoC for chronic conditions in primary healthcare.

methodsThis scoping review adopted the modified framework for interpretive scoping literature reviews. A systematic literature search in PubMed was performed, followed by a study selection process and data extraction, analysis and synthesis. Extracted data regarding the context of using CoC and the definition of CoC were analysed inductively to identify similar patterns; based on this, articles were divided into groups. MaxQDA was then used to re-code each article with themes according to the CoC definition to perform a cross-case synthesis under each identified group.

resultsA total of 55 peer-reviewed articles, comprising reviews or commentaries and qualitative or quantitative studies, were included. The number of articles has increased over the years. Five groups were identified as those (1) reflecting a change across stages or systems of care, (2) mentioning continuity or lack of continuity without a detailed definition, (3) researching CoC in HIV/AIDS programmes and its scaling up to support management of NCDs, (4) researching CoC in NCD management, and (5) measuring CoC with validated questionnaires.

conclusionResearch or policy documents need to provide an explicit definition of CoC when this terminology is used. A framework for CoC is suggested, acknowledging three components for CoC (i.e. longitudinal care, the nature of the patient-provider relationship and coordinated care) while considering relevant contextual factors, particularly access and quality.

Indexed as

Concept FormationContinuity of Patient CareDelivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesHealth ResourcesTerminology as TopicChronic DiseaseHIV InfectionsHumansNoncommunicable Diseaseschronic careContinuity of carehealth policy and systemslong-term careprimary healthcareresource-constrained setting

Identifiers

PMID30845968
PMCPMC6407241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.