Trial reportPloS one2021
The effect of a Housing First intervention on primary care retention among homeless individuals with mental illness.
Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changes in healthcare costs and utilization for Medicaid recipients who received supportive housing through a payer-community-based housing partnership.Health services research · 2025Article
- Exploring the effect of case management in homelessness per components: A systematic review of effectiveness and implementation, with meta-analysis and thematic synthesis.Campbell systematic reviews · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care retention, defined as ongoing periodic contact with a consistent primary care provider, is beneficial for people with serious chronic illnesses. This study examined the effect of a Housing First intervention on primary care retention among homeless individuals with mental illness.
methodsTwo hundred individuals enrolled in the Toronto site of the At Home Project and randomized to Housing First or Treatment As Usual were studied. Medical records were reviewed to determine if participants were retained in primary care, defined as having at least one visit with the same primary care provider in each of two consecutive six-month periods during the 12 month period preceding and following randomization.
resultsMedical records were obtained for 47 individuals randomized to Housing First and 40 individuals randomized to Treatment As Usual. During the one year period following randomization, the proportion of Housing First and Treatment As Usual participants retained in primary care was not significantly different (38.3% vs. 47.5%, p = 0.39). The change in primary care retention rates from the year preceding randomization to the year following randomization was +10.6% in the Housing First group and -5.0% in the Treatment As Usual group.
conclusionAmong homeless individuals with mental illness, Housing First did not significantly affect primary care retention over the follow-up period. These findings suggest Housing First interventions may need to place greater emphasis on connecting clients with primary care providers.
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.