Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36868787›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2023

Evaluating primary care transformation: synthesis of findings from UK pilot project reviews.

Emilie McSwiggan, Lauren Ng, Eddie Donaghy, Huayi Huang, John Gillies, David Ag Henderson, Andrew Thompson, Harry Hx Wang, Stewart W Mercer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Emilie McSwigganAdvanced Care Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Lauren NgUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Eddie DonaghyUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Huayi HuangUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
John GilliesUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
David Ag HendersonUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Andrew ThompsonSchool of Public Health, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Harry Hx WangSchool of Public Health, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0361-6527
Stewart W MercerAdvanced Care Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK stewart.mercer@ed.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1703-3664

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPilot 'new models' of primary care have been funded across the UK since 2015, through various national transformation funds. Reflections and syntheses of evaluation findings provide an additional layer of insight into 'what works' in transforming primary care.

aimTo identify good practice in policy design, implementation, and evaluation for primary care transformation. DESIGN &

settingA thematic analysis of existing pilot evaluations in England, Wales, and Scotland.

methodTen studies presenting evaluations of three national pilot studies - the Vanguard programme in England, the Pacesetter programme in Wales, and the National Evaluation of New Models of Primary Care in Scotland - were thematically analysed, and findings synthesised in order to identify lessons learnt and good practice.

resultsCommon themes emerged across studies in all three countries at project and policy level, which can support or inhibit new models of care. At project level, these included the following: working with all stakeholders, including communities and front-line staff; providing the time, space, and support necessary for the project to succeed; agreeing on clear objectives from the outset; and support for data collection, evaluation, and shared learning. At policy level, more fundamental challenges related to the parameters for pilot projects, in particular, the typically short-term nature of funding, with an expectation of results within 2-3 years. Changing expectations about outcome measures or project guidance part-way through project implementation was also identified as a key challenge.

conclusionPrimary care transformation requires coproduction and a rich, contextual understanding of local needs and complexities. However, a mismatch between policy objectives (care redesign to better meet patient needs) and policy parameters (short timeframes) is often a significant challenge to success.

Indexed as

evaluationgeneral practicenew models of carepilotsprimary health caretransformation

Identifiers

PMID36868787
PMCPMC10354383

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.