Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31409347›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2019

Towards a universal model of family centered care: a scoping review.

Kristina M Kokorelias, Monique A M Gignac, Gary Naglie, Jill I Cameron

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 207 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
207citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
39.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

207 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 481 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the TOGETHER Family-Reported Experience Measure of Nurse-Facilitated Family Engagement in Adult Acute Care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article

147 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kristina M KokoreliasRehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Avenue, Suite 160, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Monique A M GignacDalla Lana School of Public Health, Institute for Work and Health, University of Toronto, 481 University Avenue, Suite 800, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gary NaglieDepartment of Medicine and Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 3560 Bathurst Street, Room 278, Kimel Family Building, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jill I CameronRehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 500 University Avenue, Suite 160, Toronto, ON, Canada. Jill.cameron@utoronto.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4161-1572
University of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamilies play an important role meeting the care needs of individuals who require assistance due to illness and/or disability. Yet, without adequate support their own health and wellbeing can be compromised. The literature highlights the need for a move to family-centered care to improve the well-being of those with illness and/or disability and their family caregivers. The objective of this paper was to explore existing models of family-centered care to determine the key components of existing models and to identify gaps in the literature.

methodsA scoping review guided by Arksey & O'Malley (2005) examined family-centered care models for diverse illness and age populations. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE for research published between 1990 to August 1, 2018. Articles describing the development of a family-centered model in any patient population and/or healthcare field or on the development and evaluation of a family-centered service delivery intervention were included.

resultsThe search identified 14,393 papers of which 55 met our criteria and were included. Family-centered care models are most commonly available for pediatric patient populations (n = 40). Across all family-centered care models, the consistent goal is to develop and implement patient care plans within the context of families. Key components to facilitate family-centered care include: 1) collaboration between family members and health care providers, 2) consideration of family contexts, 3) policies and procedures, and 4) patient, family, and health care professional education. Some of these aspects are universal and some of these are illness specific.

conclusionsThe review identified core aspects of family-centred care models (e.g., development of a care plan in the context of families) that can be applied to all populations and care contexts and some aspects that are illness specific (e.g., illness-specific education). This review identified areas in need of further research specifically related to the relationship between care plan decision making and privacy over medical records within models of family centred care. Few studies have evaluated the impact of the various models on patient, family, or health system outcomes. Findings can inform movement towards a universal model of family-centered care for all populations and care contexts.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareGuidelines as TopicHealth PersonnelHumansPatient-Centered CareCaregiversFamily caregivingFamily centered carePatient-carePatient educationScoping review

Identifiers

PMID31409347
PMCPMC6693264
OpenAlexW2968876400

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.