Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33248004›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2021

The role of local inpatient psychiatric units and general practitioner on continuity of care in Northern Norway: A case-register study.

Lars Henrik Myklebust, Eva Lassemo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lars Henrik MyklebustSykehuset Innlandet HF, Hamar, Norway.
Eva LassemoSINTEF, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-5453-9082
Innlandet Hospital Trust · NOSINTEF · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe general practitioners' (GP) role in the care of mental health patients has received increased attention. The literature underlines the need for integration of primary and specialist services, but cross-boundary continuity for patients with severe conditions may be particularly poor. The aim of this study was to analyze the collaboration between primary care and different models of specialized psychiatric services for patients with severe conditions.

methodsWe compared a local and a centralized model of mental health care. Service utilization over a 5-year period was studied.

resultsFindings suggest that a local institution-based model of services positively affects the use of both GP and specialist outpatient care, with most inpatients utilizing both GP and specialist outpatient consultations. In the centralized model, a substantial proportion of inpatients only used GP outpatient care. Furthermore, inpatients that used both GP and specialist outpatient services received more of both services compared to those who did not enter specialist outpatient care at all.

conclusionLocal inpatient units may positively affect continuity of care and collaboration between general practitioners and specialist psychiatric services compared to more traditional hospital units, probably because better functional integration of services, better facilitation of clinical alliances/relationships, or a more network-oriented treatment philosophy.

Indexed as

General PractitionersInpatientsAmbulatory CareContinuity of Patient CareHumansNorwayReferral and Consultationcontinuity of caregeneral practitionersmental healthpsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID33248004
PMCPMC8170572
OpenAlexW3110113188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.