ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2021
Benefits of GP care in outreach settings for people experiencing homelessness: a qualitative study.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the impacts of critical time intervention implementation on health service utilization among homeless-experienced veterans: a retrospective observational study.BMC health services research · 2026Observational
- Improving access to healthcare services for people experiencing homelessness: evidence from a scoping review of interventions.Health & justice · 2025Review
- Article
- Addressing the inverse care law in Scottish general practice: systematic scoping review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- A scoping review examining patient experience and what matters to people experiencing homelessness when seeking healthcare.BMC health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough people experiencing homelessness (PEH) have the worst health outcomes in society, they have a low uptake of primary care services. GP outreach has developed as a way of increasing their access into primary care but little is known about the experience of patients receiving care in this way.
aimTo explore PEHs' experiences of GP care in community outreach settings in UK; and to seek staff/volunteers' views on the strengths and weaknesses of GP community outreach services. DESIGN AND
settingA multi-method qualitative study with PEH and staff/volunteers working in three different community outreach settings in the UK.
methodIndividual semi-structured interviews were carried out with 22 PEH and two focus groups with key staff/volunteers. Data were analysed thematically using framework analysis.
resultsGP outreach services better enabled PEH to access medical care and staff/volunteers valued GP support to promote, and facilitate access to, healthcare services. In particular, the findings illuminate the high value that PEH placed on the organisational environment of the GP outreach service. Valued aspects of GP outreach were identified as comfortable, safe, and engendering a sense of belonging; convenient, opportunistic, and a one-stop shop; and being heard, having more time, and breaking down barriers.
conclusionThe organisational environment is important in enabling PEH to engage with GP services. The physical and organisational environment of the outreach settings were the most important factors; they created a space where professional barriers between the GP and patients were flattened, so facilitating a therapeutic relationship.
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.