ArticleBMJ open2023
Models, theoretical design and formal evaluation of integrated specialist community health service provision for the first 2000 days: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Five years of the Implementation Research Logic Model: a citation analysis and systematic scoping review of its use in implementation research and practice.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
- Article
- Design of an Early Year's Intervention With and for the Community: A Needs Assessment and Gap Analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025Article
- Housing Australian Children: A Snapshot of Health Inequities in the First 2000 Days.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2024Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis scoping review identifies evidence for design, models and evaluation of integrated care service provision for families and children in the first 2000 days, in the context of community-based specialised health, education and welfare services.
designScoping review following the Joanna Briggs scoping review method. DATA SOURCES: Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane and PsycINFO. Grey literature used a manual search of original articles, and snowball technique to identify government and policy documents relevant to Australia. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Inclusion criteria were 'population' of prebirth to age 5; 'concept' of design, models and delivery of integrated specialist care for children and families; and 'context' of community-based specialised health, education and welfare services. Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) and free text searches were conducted in electronic database sources. Limits January 2010 to October 2022, full text, English language, human. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted independently by two authors using a piloted data extraction table and presented in table and narrative form.
resultsFull text of 11 articles were reviewed, domains were coded using four domains of a framework identified in one reviewed article to maintain consistency of reporting; 'governance,' 'leadership,' 'organisational culture and ethos,' and 'front-line interdisciplinary practice.' A fifth domain was identified, 'access.'
conclusionsServices providing integrated care for families in the early years will ideally be based on values generated through codesign with families and the community. Considerations include sound governance and leadership, shared vision, and commitment to providing accessible and culturally safe family-centred care.
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.