Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31685511›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Lessons learnt from the implementation of new care models in the NHS: a qualitative study of the North East Vanguards programme.

Gregory Maniatopoulos, David J Hunter, Jonathan Erskine, Bob Hudson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Gregory ManiatopoulosInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK gregory.maniatopoulos@ncl.ac.uk.
David J HunterInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jonathan ErskineDurham University, Durham, UK.
Bob HudsonCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine lessons learnt from the implementation of five Vanguard initiatives in the North East of England.

designData collection comprised semistructured interviews with key informants at each site.

settingThe study took place across six local authority areas in the North East of England and within six clinical commissioning groups responsible for the delivery of each Vanguard's aims and objectives.

participantsSixty-six interviewees with participants from five Vanguard initiatives in the North East of England, including senior clinicians, project leads and directors, commissioners, and healthcare managers.

resultsWhile the context for each Vanguard is separate and distinct, there also exists a set of common issues which have a regional dimension. Participants felt that the national programme helped to raise the profile of local change initiatives and also contributed to the wider understanding of regional service integration issues. At the same time our findings demonstrate that all five sites experienced, and were subject to, unrealistic pressure placed on them to deliver outcomes. Of particular concern among all sites was the sheer scale and pace of change occurring at the same time as the National Health Service was being tasked with making significant, if unrealistic, efficiency savings.

conclusionsIt is too early to conclude with any confidence that a successful outcome for the new care models programme will be forthcoming. While early indications show some encouraging signs of promise, the overall context in which the complex and ambitious changes are being implemented remains both fragile and fluid.

Indexed as

Models, OrganizationalDelivery of Health CareEnglandGovernment ProgramsHumansQualitative ResearchState MedicineEnglandHealth systemsImplementationNational Health ServiceNew Care Models

Identifiers

PMID31685511
PMCPMC6858185

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.