ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2022
Learning from the GP-consultant exchange scheme: a qualitative evaluation.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Workplace-based knowledge exchange programmes between academics, policy-makers and providers of healthcare: a qualitative study.BMJ leader · 2024Article
- Learning from the GP-consultant exchange scheme: a qualitative evaluation.MedEdPublish (2016) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collaborative working across primary and secondary care is crucial to providing high quality patient care. There is still a lack of communication and understanding between primary and secondary care, which can impede collaborative working. The experience of observing colleagues in a different speciality can prompt insight, improve morale and promote collaborative working. The GP-Consultant Exchange Scheme aimed to improve professional understanding, foster deeper partnerships, and ignite opportunities for innovation and/or quality improvement (QI) with co-owned local solutions. This paper gives an overview of how the scheme works and sets out some of the outcomes reported by some 200 Consultants and GPs participants to date. Overall, the participants found the scheme an enjoyable way to reconnect clinicians and allowed them to learn about the challenges faced in different areas within the NHS. This low-cost intervention needs motivated individuals to drive the project forward and make it sustainable, but it can be replicated within any organisation or profession in the NHS.
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.