ReviewSSM - population health2021
Community-engaged healthcare model for currently under-served individuals involved in the healthcare system.
Review in SSM - population health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advisory groups in realist reviews: Systematically mapping current research and recommendations for practice.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Review
- Socioeconomic and behavioral determinants of non-compliance with physician referrals following community screening for diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipidemia: a mixed-methods study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Navigating financial toxicity in patients with cancer: A multidisciplinary management approach.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2022Review
- Project COALESCE-An Example of Academic Institutions as Conveners of Community-Clinic Partnerships to Improve Cancer Screening Access.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the US, many people are excluded from healthcare structures and systems, due to multiple macro and micro factors. Poverty, health ecosystems, mental health, and community amenities are some of the issues confronting those who are not able to access appropriate support. This population is often referred to as 'high needs, high cost' (HNHC), a term that has been applied to refer to people who repeatedly utilize services without significant benefit (we have replaced this term with 'currently under-served'; C-US). For many traditional health solutions may not address the fundamental issues confronting their health. Community-Engaged Healthcare (CEH) is an approach that equips members of the community to levy power to advocate for their own health or social solutions, designing their own interventions to address needs with support from health providers. A realist review was conducted to identify the existing literature around CEH. This yielded ten papers that were reviewed by at least two authors and rated in terms of quality. A model describing the processes underpinning CEH was then iteratively generated, resulting in additional terms that were used in a second review of the literature. A further 16 peer-reviewed articles were identified and were independently reviewed and quality rated. These articles were used to refine further iterations of the model and included in the review where appropriate. The resulting model schematically posits a set of relational factors identified to be important in the establishment of CEH. Notably, the transfer of autonomy and power over health decision-making processes is emphasized, which will require revolutionary thinking about how healthcare is delivered for patients.
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.