ArticleSingapore medical journal2023
Integrated care teams in primary care improve clinical outcomes and care processes in patients with non-communicable diseases.
Article in Singapore medical journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding competencies to manage multimorbidity in primary care: A focus group study with professionals and patients.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- Article
- Rising to the challenges of research in multiple long-term conditions: health and social care research ecosystem approaches.BMJ open · 2025Review
- Clinical and economic outcomes of multidisciplinary team members in primary care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Qualitative study on the perceived enablers and barriers to interprofessional education in primary care in Singapore.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Primary health care in Austria: qualitative analysis of requirements and challenges in interprofessional collaboration from the perspective of health care and social professionals.Primary health care research & development · 2025Article
- Mixed method program impact evaluation: Reducing economic barriers to accessing health services (REBAHS) long-term primary healthcare subsidization protocol (LPSP) II action in Lebanon.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Integration Strategies in the Implementation of a Cardiology Chronic Care Clinic in a Primary Care Setting: A Qualitative Study.International journal of integrated careArticle
- Self-Efficacy in Patients With Hypertension and Their Perceived Usage of Patient Portals.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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
Introduction: Primary care physicians face the increasing burden of managing multimorbidities in an ageing population. Implementing an integrated care team (ICT) with defined roles and accountability to share consultation tasks is an emerging care model to address this issue. This study compared outcomes with ICT versus usual care for patients with multimorbidities in primary care. Methods: Data was retrospectively extracted from the electronic medical records (EMRs) of consecutive adult Asian patients empanelled to ICT and those in UC at a typical primary care clinic (polyclinic) in eastern Singapore in 2018. The study population had hypertension, and/or hyperlipidaemia and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Clinical outcomes included the proportion of patients (ICT vs. UC) who attained their treatment goals after 12 months. Process outcomes included the proportion of patients who completed annual diabetic eye and foot screenings, where applicable. Results: Data from 3,302 EMRs (ICT = 1,723, UC = 1,579) from January 2016 to September 2017 was analysed. The ICT cohort was more likely to achieve treatment goals for systolic blood pressure (SBP) (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.38-1.68), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (AOR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.49-1.99), and glycated haemoglobin (AOR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.09-1.51). The ICT group had higher uptake of diabetic retinal screening (89.1% vs. 83.0%, P < 0.001) and foot screening (85.2% vs. 77.9%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: The ICT model yielded better clinical and process outcomes than UC, with more patients attaining treatment goals.
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.