Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33961210›Full record

SynthesisMaternal and child health journal2021

Pediatric Group Care: A Systematic Review.

Emily Gaskin, Kim Weber Yorga, Rebecca Berman, Mandy Allison, Jeanelle Sheeder

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Maternal and child health journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Integrating postnatal care into the redesign of group care beyond birth.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Emily GaskinPrevention Research Center at University of Colorado, Aurora, USA. emily.gaskin@cuanschutz.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1351-7901
Kim Weber YorgaPrevention Research Center at University of Colorado, Aurora, USA.
Rebecca BermanPrevention Research Center at University of Colorado, Aurora, USA.
Mandy AllisonObstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics at University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, USA.
Jeanelle SheederObstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics at University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, USA.
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · USChildren's Hospital Colorado · USNurse-Family Partnership · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe characteristics and outcomes of Group Well-Child Care programs and provide recommendations for future research.

methodsInformed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, an electronic references database, manual search of bibliographies and peer-reviewed journals, and general Internet search were conducted including research published up to July 2019. English language, peer-reviewed research, with provision of medical care were included. Studies without published outcomes, not specific to well-child care, or included only one visit were excluded. Nineteen articles met review criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black tool for rigor.

resultsPrograms typically included an individual medical examination, check-in, and group discussion. Demographics varied by race, ethnicity, age, income level, education and parity, though many were used specifically with underserved populations. Group size ranged from 3 to 10 and lasted an average of 1.5 h over a period of 6-24 months. Evidence suggests group well-child care is as effective as individual care with improvement noted for health-care utilization, weight outcomes, and more content covered. Design elements such as patient-led discussion, self-check-in, inclusion of other family members, and use of a variety of health care professionals and para-professionals may influence these outcomes.

conclusionsGroup well-child care is useful in providing efficient and patient-centered care and shows promise for use in underserved populations. Future research should utilize more rigorous study design and include evaluations of program components and group processes to address implementation challenges and determine effectiveness.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPatient-Centered CareFamilyFemaleHumansPregnancyGroup careGroup well-child careMedical homePediatrics

Identifiers

PMID33961210
OpenAlexW3158686129

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.