Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36304783›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care

Commissioning [Integrated] Care in England: An Analysis of the Current Decision Context.

Pamela Gongora-Salazar, Margaret Glogowska, Ray Fitzpatrick, Rafael Perera, Apostolos Tsiachristas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Commissioning and co-production in health and care services in the United Kingdom and Ireland: An exploratory literature review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

5 authors.

Pamela Gongora-SalazarHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, GB.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3160-7097
Margaret GlogowskaNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, GB.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8029-1052
Ray FitzpatrickNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, GB.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0607-0563
Rafael PereraNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, GB.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2418-2091
Apostolos TsiachristasHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, GB.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4662-8915

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The emergence of Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) across England poses an additional challenge and responsibility for local commissioners to accelerate the implementation of integrated care programmes and improve the overall efficiency across the system. To do this, ICS healthcare commissioners could learn from the experience of the former local commissioning structures and identify areas of improvement in the commissioning process. This study describes the investment decision process in integrated care amid the transition toward ICSs, highlights challenges, and provides recommendations to inform ICSs in their healthcare commissioning role. Methods: Twenty-six semi-structured interviews were conducted with local commissioners and other relevant stakeholders in South East England in 2021. Interviews were supplemented with literature. Results: England's local healthcare commissioning has made the transition towards a new organisational architecture, with some integrated care programmes running, and a dual top-down and bottom-up prioritisation process in place. The commissioning and consequent development of integrated care programmes have been hindered by various barriers, including difficulties in accessing and using information, operational challenges, and resource constraints. Investment decisions have mainly been driven by national directives and budget considerations, with a mixture of subjective and objective approaches. A systematic and data-driven framework could replace this ad-hoc prioritisation of integrated care and contribute to a more rational and transparent commissioning process. Conclusion: The emerging ICSs seem to open an opportunity for local commissioners to strengthen the commissioning process of integrated care with evidence-based priority-setting approaches similar to the well-established health technology assessment framework at the national level.

Indexed as

commissioningEnglandintegrated careinvestment decisionnew models of carepriority-setting

Identifiers

PMID36304783
PMCPMC9541117

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.