ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2021
An Overview of Reviews on Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Effectiveness.
Article in International journal of integrated care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Interprofessional collaboration in primary care: what effect on patient health? A systematic literature review.BMC primary care · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of collaborative care on recognition and management of common mental disorders by general practitioners: a cluster-randomised trial in Norway.BMC primary care · 2026Trial
- Development of an interprofessional person-centred care concept for persons with care needs living in their own homes in Germany (interprof HOME): a mixed methods study.BMC primary care · 2025Trial
- A collaborative primary and mental health care model with psychologist and psychiatrist working in GP practices: process evaluation of the implementation, challenges, and sustainability.BMC health services research · 2025Trial
- Beyond clinical care: A qualitative study on the leadership role of general practitioners in dutch interprofessional care for older adults.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Developing an interprofessional self-reflection logbook in reproductive health in low-middle income countries: educational design research.Korean journal of medical education · 2026Article
- Interprofessional team members' experiences collaborating with pharmacists in team-based primary care in British Columbia, Canada: a qualitative evaluation.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Dual Workload Related to Agriculture/Fishing and Family Involvement in the Household Among Rural and Small-Scale Fishing Workers in Southern Brazil: Implications for Nursing Care Organization in Primary Health Care.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
- Interprofessional education and its impact on learners' attitudes over time: a cross-lagged panel analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Enhancing Care Coordination and Patient Engagement Through Electronic Medical Record Utilization in Primary Healthcare: A Mixed-Methods Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development and content validation of an interprofessional collaboration model for child sexual abuse prevention in primary health care.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- A Survey of Primary Care Administrators' Experiences During Integration of Pharmacists into Team-Based Primary Care in British Columbia.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- Combining Token Classification With Large Language Model Revision for Age-Friendly 4M Entity Recognition From Nursing Home Text Messages: Development and Evaluation Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Readiness for interprofessional learning among undergraduate health discipline students: A multisite study.Curationis · 2026Article
- Enhancing System Empathy Within a UK Emergency Department: A Feasibility Interprofessional Priority Setting Exercise.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Co-designing an interprofessional care pathway for (risk of) malnutrition and sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Healthcare educators' perspectives on IPE implementation at a Saudi university: a qualitative study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Core values and best practice criteria for interprofessional teams in primary care: a qualitative interview study with general practitioners and other health professionals from Bavaria, Germany.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Inter-professional collaboration in family doctor teams of the Chinese primary care system: a thematic analysis.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Interprofessional Collaboration in Primary Care: Concept Analysis.Journal of caring sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInterprofessional collaboration (IPC) is increasingly used but diversely implemented in primary care. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of IPC in primary care settings.
methodsAn overview (review of systematic reviews) was carried out. We searched nine databases and employed a double selection and data extraction method. Patient-related outcomes were categorized, and results coded as improvement (+), worsening (-), mixed results (?) or no change (0).
results34 reviews were included. Six types of IPC were identified: IPC in primary care (large scope) (n = 8), physician-nurse in primary care (n = 1), primary care physician (PCP)-specialty care provider (n = 5), PCP-pharmacist (n = 3), PCP-mental healthcare provider (n = 15), and intersectoral collaboration (n = 2). In general, IPC in primary care was beneficial for patients with variation between types of IPC. Whereas reviews about IPC in primary care (large scope) showed better processes of care and higher patient satisfaction, other types of IPC reported mixed results for clinical outcomes, healthcare use and patient-reported outcomes. Also, reviews focusing on interventions based on pre-existing and well-defined models, such as collaborative care, overall reported more benefits. However, heterogeneity between the included primary studies hindered comparison and often led to the report of mixed results. Finally, professional- and organizational-related outcomes were under-reported, and cost-related outcomes showed some promising results for IPC based on pre-existing models; results were lacking for other types.
conclusionsThis overview suggests that interprofessional collaboration can be effective in primary care. Better understanding of the characteristics of IPC processes, their implementation, and the identification of effective elements, merits further attention.
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.