Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33024426›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2020

Evaluating Large-Scale Integrated Care Projects: The Development of a Protocol for a Mixed Methods Realist Evaluation Study in Belgium.

Geert Goderis, Elien Colman, Lucia Alvarez Irusta, Ann Van Hecke, Benoit Pétré, Dirk Devroey, Elias Van Deun, Kristof Faes, Nathan Charlier, Nick Verhaeghe and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of integrated care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Health and Social Care Reform in Scotland - What Next?International journal of integrated care
    Article
  8. 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

14 authors.

Geert GoderisAcademic Center of General Practice, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer Leuven, BE.
Elien ColmanDepartment of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care (ELIZA)-Centre for General Practice, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Doornstraat Antwerp, BE.
Lucia Alvarez IrustaInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos chapelle aux champs Brussels, BE.
Ann Van HeckeDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Ghent University, Ghent, BE.
Benoit PétréPublic Health Department, University of Liege, Quartier Hôpital, Avenue Hippocrate, Liège, BE.
Dirk DevroeyDepartment of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, BE.
Elias Van DeunLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven, BE.
Kristof FaesDepartment of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, BE.
Nathan CharlierPublic Health Department, University of Liege, Quartier Hôpital, Avenue Hippocrate, Liège, BE.
Nick VerhaegheDepartment of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, BE.
Roy RemmenDepartment of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care (ELIZA)-Centre for General Practice, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Doornstraat Antwerp, BE.
Sibyl AnthierensDepartment of Primary and Interdisciplinary Care (ELIZA)-Centre for General Practice, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Doornstraat Antwerp, BE.
Walter SermeusLeuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven, BE.
Jean MacqInstitute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos chapelle aux champs Brussels, BE.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe twelve Integrated Care Program pilot projects (ICPs) created by the government plan

methodsA scientific team was commissioned to co-design and implement an evaluation protocol in close collaboration with the government, the ICPs and several other involved stakeholders.

resultsA protocol for a mixed methods realist evaluation was developed to gain insights into the mechanisms that foster successful results in ICPs. The qualitative evaluation proposed will be based on the document analysis of yearly ICP progress reports, selected case studies and focus group interviews with stakeholders. Processes and outcomes of all the projects will be monitored using indicators based on administrative data on population health and the quality and costs of care. A yearly survey will be organized to collect data on patient-reported outcomes and experiences and on provider-reported measures of inter-professional collaboration and proper wellbeing. Using both quantitative and qualitative data, we will develop theories about the mechanisms and the associated contextual factors that lead to integrated care and the Quadruple Aim outcomes. DISCUSSION: The objective of this study is to deliver policy recommendations on strategies and best practices to improve care integration in Belgium and to implement a sustainable monitoring system that serves both policy makers and the stakeholders within the ICPs. Some challenges due to the large scale of the project and the multiple stakeholders involved may impede the successful implementation of this proposal.

Indexed as

chronic conditionshealth systems researchintegrated caremixed methodsrealist evaluation

Identifiers

PMID33024426
PMCPMC7518071

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.