ReviewRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2020
[Skill mix of nurses and primary health care professionals: a systematic review].
Review in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The application of metagenomics in the detection of arboviruses in mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidade): a systematic review.Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo · 2025Pooled it
- Detection of Plasmodium in Anopheles spp (Diptera: Nematocera: Culicidae) using molecular biology techniques: a systematic review.Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo · 2025Pooled it
- Expanding the scope of practice for nurses: possibilities in five Latin American countries.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Mental health and perceived social support among nurses working in primary care.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Physicians' and nurses' perspective on chronic disease care practices in Primary Health Care in Brazil: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy of skill mix of nurses and other health care professionals in primary health care.
methodsSystematic review of the literature aligned with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), including observational and intervention studies. No restrictions were established for period or country of publication; studies published in Spanish, English and Portuguese were included. The search was carried out in MEDLINE, CINAHL, LILACS, EMBASE and Web of Science electronic databases.
resultsEighteen studies were analyzed, including 6 from the United States; 3 from the Netherlands; 2 from the United Kingdom; 1 each from Australia, South Africa, South Korea, Scotland, Haiti and Japan; and 1 study with a prospective observational design from 8 countries. The studies reported that the skill mix among health professionals enables a better use of material resources; optimizes time spent on care; improves adhesion to treatment, quality of care and commitment and satisfaction with the work; and reduces the level of psychological distress in nursing professionals.
conclusionsThe expansion of tasks of nurses and other health care professionals, and the skill mix as well as the development of interprofessional teams, are strategies that help to face a scarcity and poor distribution of human resources in urban and non-urban areas with improvement of the health care of the population and satisfaction of professionals and clients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.