ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2023
[Regional Health Care Networks in Germany: Characteristics and Financing Illustrated with Dementia Care Networks].
Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo describe the characteristics, financing structures and challenges of regional dementia care networks and the use of regional financial network support according to § 45c para. 9 SGB XI.
methodsThe analysis was based on data from 120 dementia networks that provided information on the network characteristics (location, year of foundation, goals, organizational, personnel and financing structure), the challenges and the use of regional network funding according to § 45c Para. 9 SGB XI. Differences in the organizational, personnel and financing structure depending on the network characteristics were analyzed using t-Tests and ANOVA tests. The use of regional network funding (§ 45c Para. 9) were presented descriptively and discussed against the background of the planned amendment for 2022.
resultsThe majority of networks were established between 2011 and 2015. Most networks had educational and care goals and, on average, 28 stakeholders. Medically-associated and longer-established networks and networks with a legal form had significantly more network partners, persons actively involved in the work of the network and funding sources. The linking of stakeholders and the funding were seen as the most significant challenges. Every tenth network received regional network funding (§45c para. 9) but 28% decided not to receive funding. For most networks (50%), the funding was still unknown.
conclusionRegional dementia networks are very heterogeneously structured. Certain factors can significantly affect the number of partners and funding sources and should, therefore, be considered. Up to now, only one network per region could receive the maximum amount (€20,000) of funding according to §45c para. 9, which limits the usability of this funding, especially in densely populated regions. The amendment now increases the number of networks to be funded within one region and the funding level. It remains to be seen to what extent this amendment will increase the use of the regional network funding.
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.