Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32546492›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Protocol for a realist review of General Practitioners' Role in Advancing Practice in Care Homes (GRAPE study).

Adam L Gordon, Reena Devi, Christopher Williams, Claire Goodman, Kathleen Sartain, Neil H Chadborn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Adam L GordonSchool of Medicine, Division of Medical Science and Graduate Entry Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1676-9853
Reena DeviSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Christopher WilliamsDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, Leicestershire, UK.
Claire GoodmanCentre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8938-4893
Kathleen SartainDementia and Frail Older Persons PPI Group, Division of Rehabilitation and Ageing, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK.
Neil H ChadbornSchool of Medicine, Division of Medical Science and Graduate Entry Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK Neil.Chadborn@nottingham.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1368-7983
University of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Hertfordshire · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of Leicester · GB

Funding

Department of Health 11/1021/02Department of Health NIHR127257The Dunhill Medical Trust FOP1/0115
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOlder people who live in care homes have a high level of need with complex health conditions. In addition to providing medical care to residents, general practitioners (GPs) play a role as gatekeeper for access to services, as well as leadership within healthcare provision. This review will describe how GPs were involved in initiatives to change arrangements of healthcare services in order to improve quality and experience of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Following RAMESES quality and publication guidelines standards, we will proceed with realist review to develop theories of how GPs work with care home staff to bring about improvements. We identify when improvement in outcomes does not occur and why this may be the case. The first stage will include interviews with GPs to ask their views on improvement in care homes. These interviews will enable development of initial theories and give direction for the literature searches. In the second stage, we will use iterative literature searches to add depth and context to the early theories; databases will include Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and ASSIA. In stage 3, evidence that is judged as rigorous and relevant will be used to test the initial theories, and through the process, refine the theory statements. In the final stage, we will synthesise findings and provide recommendations for practice and policy-making.During the review, we will invite a context expert group to reflect on our findings. This group will have expertise in current trends in primary care and the care home sector both in UK and internationally. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by University of Nottingham Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee: 354-1907. Findings will be shared through stakeholder networks, published in National Institute for Health Research journal and submitted for peer-reviewed journal publication.

Indexed as

General PractitionersHealth Services for the AgedHomes for the AgedPhysician's RoleAgedAged, 80 and overHumansResearch DesignReview Literature as Topicadult palliative carechange managementgeriatric medicineprimary carequality in health caresocial medicine

Identifiers

PMID32546492
PMCPMC7299033
OpenAlexW3034965590

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.