SynthesisJAMA network open2021
Assessment of Interprofessional Collaborative Practices and Outcomes in Adults With Diabetes and Hypertension in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 44 papers, 5 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 106 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of the Interprofessional Collaborative Education Program (IPCEP) on the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of diabetic foot care among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a narrative review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Involving community pharmacists in interprofessional collaboration in primary care: a systematic review.BMC primary care · 2024Pooled it
- Interprofessional collaboration in primary care: what effect on patient health? A systematic literature review.BMC primary care · 2023Pooled it
- Assessing the Effectiveness of mHealth Interventions for Diabetes and Hypertension Management in Africa: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Pooled it
- Healthcare Utilisation and Clinical Outcomes in Older Cardiovascular Patients Receiving Comprehensive Medication Management Services: A Nonrandomised Clinical Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- A Survey of Primary Care Administrators' Experiences During Integration of Pharmacists into Team-Based Primary Care in British Columbia.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- [Interprofessional collaboration in internal medicine : Developments between health professions in German language publications].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Obesity pillars roundtable: Better together - combined obesity medicine and metabolic surgery care for the treatment of obesity.Obesity pillars · 2026Article
- Community-Engaged Scholarship: An Interpartner Approach for Collaborative Practice.Behavior and social issues · 2026Article
- 1. Improving Care and Promoting Health in Populations: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026.Diabetes care · 2026Review
- Core shared competencies between physicians and nurses in primary care: a Delphi study in Korea.Korean journal of medical education · 2025Article
- Contribution of Final-Year Medical Students to Hypertension Diagnosis in Primary Care Units.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- Student experiences and learning outcomes of an interprofessional and international service-learning program: an exploratory study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Clinical and economic outcomes of multidisciplinary team members in primary care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Core program elements for equitable, effective participation in a lifestyle medicine program for chronic musculoskeletal pain.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Patient experience and primary care teams: a cross-sectional survey of French elderly patients.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Health professionals' willingness to share responsibility and strengthen interprofessional collaboration: a cross-sectional survey.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Impact of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sourcing on Real-World Adherence and Health Care Costs: A Comparative Analysis by Insurance Type.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025Article
- Constipation and Cardiovascular Mortality Risk in Patients With Hypertension: A Long-Term Cohort Study.International journal of hypertension · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Interprofessional collaborative practice (ICP), the collaboration of health workers from different professional backgrounds with patients, families, caregivers, and communities, is central to optimal primary care. However, limited evidence exists regarding its association with patient outcomes. Objective: To examine the association of ICP with hemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) levels among adults receiving primary care. Data Sources: A literature search of English language journals (January 2013-2018; updated through March 2020) was conducted using MEDLINE; Embase; Ovid IPA; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials: Issue 2 of 12, February 2018; NHS Economic Evaluation Database: Issue 2 of 4, April 2015; Clarivate Analytics WOS Science Citation Index Expanded (1990-2018); EBSCOhost CINAHL Plus With Full Text (1937-2018); Elsevier Scopus; FirstSearch OAIster; AHRQ PCMH Citations Collection; ClinicalTrials.gov; and HSRProj. Study Selection: Studies needed to evaluate the association of ICP (≥3 professions) with HbA1c, SBP, or DBP levels in adults with diabetes and/or hypertension receiving primary care. A dual review was performed for screening and selection. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guideline for data abstractions and Cochrane Collaboration recommendations for bias assessment. Two dual review teams conducted independent data extraction with consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model for meta-analyses and forest plots constructed to report standardized mean differences (SMDs). For high heterogeneity (I2), data were stratified by baseline level and by study design. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes included HbA1c, SBP, and DBP levels as determined before data collection. Results: A total of 3543 titles or abstracts were screened; 170 abstracts or full texts were reviewed. Of 50 articles in the systematic review, 39 (15 randomized clinical trials [RCTs], 24 non-RCTs) were included in the meta-analyses of HbA1c (n = 34), SBP (n = 25), and DBP (n = 24). The sample size ranged from 40 to 20 524, and mean age ranged from 51 to 70 years, with 0% to 100% participants being male. Varied ICP features were reported. The SMD varied by baseline HbA1c, although all SMDs significantly favored ICP (HbA1c <8, SMD = -0.13; P < .001; HbA1c ≥8 to < 9, SMD = -0.24; P = .007; and HbA1c ≥9, SMD = -0.60; P < .001). The SMD for SBP and DBP were -0.31 (95% CI, -0.46 to -0.17); P < .001 and -0.28 (95% CI, -0.42 to -0.14); P < .001, respectively, with effect sizes not associated with baseline levels. Overall I2 was greater than 80% for all outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ICP was associated with reductions in HbA1c regardless of baseline levels as well as with reduced SBP and DBP. However, the greatest reductions were found with HbA1c levels of 9 or higher. The implementation of ICP in primary care may be associated with improvements in patient outcomes in diabetes and hypertension.
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.