Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36429492›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Models of Care and Relationships with Care Homes: Cross-Sectional Survey of English General Practices.

Krystal Warmoth, Claire Goodman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Krystal WarmothCentre for Research in Public Health and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield AL10 9AB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0615-5778
Claire GoodmanCentre for Research in Public Health and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield AL10 9AB, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Enhanced Health in Care Homes framework for England sets out standards for how primary care should work with care homes. How care home staff and General Practitioners work together and the quality of their working relationships are core to resident healthcare. This study explored the current models of care and relationships between General Practitioners' practices and care homes. Sixty-seven respondents from 35 practices were recruited in the East of England and completed a semi-structured online survey. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. Free text responses were interpreted thematically. The number of care homes that practices supported ranged from 0-15. Most reported having designated General Practitioners working with care homes and a good working relationship. Despite the national rollout of the Enhanced Health in Care Homes framework, two-thirds reported no recent changes in how they worked with care homes. There is a shift towards practices working with fewer care homes and fewer accounts of fractured working relationships, suggesting that residents' access to primary care is improving. The continuing variability suggests further work is needed to ensure it is driven by context, not inequitable provision. Future work needs to address how policy changes are changing work practices and residents' health outcomes.

Indexed as

General PracticeNursing HomesCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesGPlong-term carenursing homesprimary careresidential care

Identifiers

PMID36429492
PMCPMC9690840

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.