Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33586769›Full record

ReviewFamily practice2021

Lessons for the global primary care response to COVID-19: a rapid review of evidence from past epidemics.

Jane Desborough, Sally Hall Dykgraaf, Christine Phillips, Michael Wright, Raglan Maddox, Stephanie Davis, Michael Kidd

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Family practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Jane DesboroughDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, Research School of Population Health, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1406-4593
Sally Hall DykgraafAustralian National University Rural Clinical School, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Christine PhillipsAustralian National University Medical School, College of Health and Medicine Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Michael WrightCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Raglan MaddoxCOVID-19 Primary Care Response Group, Australian Department of Health, Canberra, Australia.
Stephanie DavisCOVID-19 Primary Care Response Group, Australian Department of Health, Canberra, Australia.
Michael KiddAustralian Government Department of Health, Canberra, Australia.
Australian National University · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 is the fifth and most significant infectious disease epidemic this century. Primary health care providers, which include those working in primary care and public health roles, have critical responsibilities in the management of health emergencies.

objectiveTo synthesize accounts of primary care lessons learnt from past epidemics and their relevance to COVID-19.

methodsWe conducted a review of lessons learnt from previous infectious disease epidemics for primary care, and their relevance to COVID-19. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, PROQUEST and Google Scholar, hand-searched reference lists of included studies, and included research identified through professional contacts.

resultsOf 173 publications identified, 31 publications describing experiences of four epidemics in 11 countries were included. Synthesis of findings identified six key lessons: (i) improve collaboration, communication and integration between public health and primary care; (ii) strengthen the primary health care system; (iii) provide consistent, coordinated and reliable information emanating from a trusted source; (iv) define the role of primary care during pandemics; (v) protect the primary care workforce and the community and (vi) evaluate the effectiveness of interventions.

conclusionsEvidence highlights distinct challenges to integrating and supporting primary care in response to infectious disease epidemics that have persisted over time, emerging again during COVID-19. These insights provide an opportunity for strengthening, and improved preparedness, that cannot be ignored in a world where the frequency, virility and global reach of infectious disease outbreaks are increasing. It is not too soon to plan for the next pandemic, which may already be on the horizon.

Indexed as

COVID-19Disease OutbreaksHumansPandemicsPrimary Health CareSARS-CoV-2COVID-19epidemicsevidence synthesisprimary carepublic healthrapid review

Identifiers

PMID33586769
PMCPMC7928916
OpenAlexW3129888581

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.