Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34886452›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Group Medical Care: A Systematic Review of Health Service Performance.

Shayna D Cunningham, Ryan A Sutherland, Chloe W Yee, Jordan L Thomas, Joan K Monin, Jeannette R Ickovics, Jessica B Lewis

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Patient Characteristics Associated With Group Prenatal Care Attendance in a Randomized Controlled Trial.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    Trial
  6. Group medical visits in cancer survivorship care: a scoping review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Enhancing Resident Education and Expanding Care with Group Medical Visits/Shared Medical Appointments.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Optimizing Diabetes Care Through Listening to Multiple Voices.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shayna D CunninghamDepartment of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT 06030, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8876-9962
Ryan A SutherlandDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Chloe W YeeDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Jordan L ThomasDepartment of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
Joan K MoninDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Jeannette R IckovicsDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.
Jessica B LewisDepartment of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4602-0130
Yale University · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Connecticut · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Group care models, in which patients with similar health conditions receive medical services in a shared appointment, have increasingly been adopted in a variety of health care settings. Applying the Triple Aim framework, we examined the potential of group medical care to optimize health system performance through improved patient experience, better health outcomes, and the reduced cost of health care. A systematic review of English language articles was conducted using the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. Studies based on data from randomized control trials (RCTs) conducted in the US and analyzed using an intent-to-treat approach to test the effect of group visits versus standard individual care on at least one Triple Aim domain were included. Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies focused on pregnancy (n = 9), diabetes (n = 15), and other chronic health conditions (n = 7). Compared with individual care, group visits have the potential to improve patient experience, health outcomes, and costs for a diversity of health conditions. Although findings varied between studies, no adverse effects were associated with group health care delivery in these randomized controlled trials. Group care models may contribute to quality improvements, better health outcomes, and lower costs for select health conditions.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesDiabetes MellitusChronic DiseaseFemaleHealth ServicesHumansPatient CarePregnancychronic disease managementdiabetesgroup carepregnancytriple aim

Identifiers

PMID34886452
PMCPMC8657170
OpenAlexW4200086199

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.