ArticleInternational journal of integrated care
Consensus on Integrated Care for Older People Among Dutch Experts: A Delphi Study.
Article in International journal of integrated care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current status and progress of validation studies on the ICOPE scale: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessment of Critical Health and Safety Risks in Homes where Hoarding is Prevalent.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- Community Specialist Teams for Older People Consensus Development: A Real-Time Delphi Approach.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn a previous rapid realist review (RRR), an initial programme theory (PT) was established giving insight into the interrelatedness of context items, mechanisms, programme-activities, and outcomes that influence integrated care programmes (ICPs) for community-dwelling frail older people. As ICPs need to be tailored to their local setting, the objective of this study is to assess consensus on the relevance of the items identified in the RRR for the Dutch setting, and refine the PT, where appropriate.
methodsA two-round e-Delphi study was carried out among Dutch experts to determine the relevance of 71 items.
resultsConsensus on relevance was reached on 57 out of 71 items (80%). Items added to refine the PT included: increasing number of older people, decreasing access to hospital beds, well-designed ICP implementation processes, case management, having a clear portfolio of patients, the role of the government, aligning existing health and social care systems, management and monitoring of care activities, strong relationship between older person and healthcare providers (HCP), and providing continuous feedback to HCPs. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: The initial PT was refined for the Dutch setting. Items on which no consensus was found, need to be further investigated on the reason behind it.
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.