Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37250761›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of integrated care

Measurement Instruments for Integration within Children and Young People Healthcare Systems and Networks: A Rapid Review of the International Literature.

Zainab Dedat, Steven Hope, Dougal Hargreaves, Oliver Lloyd-Houldey, Dasha Nicholls, Steph Scott, Evgenia Stepanova, Carolyn Summerbell, Russell M Viner, Frances Hillier-Brown

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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  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

10 authors.

Zainab DedatPopulation, Policy & Practice Research & Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond St. Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Steven HopePopulation, Policy & Practice Research & Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond St. Institute of Child Health, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6759-6927
Dougal HargreavesMohn Centre for Children's Health & Wellbeing, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0722-9847
Oliver Lloyd-HouldeyPopulation, Policy & Practice Research & Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond St. Institute of Child Health, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6081-3546
Dasha NichollsDivision of Psychiatry, Department of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7257-6605
Steph ScottFuse -Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5334-9746
Evgenia StepanovaFuse -Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2899-4898
Carolyn SummerbellFuse -Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1910-9383
Russell M VinerPopulation, Policy & Practice Research & Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond St. Institute of Child Health, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3047-2247
Frances Hillier-BrownFuse -Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9031-4801

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Robust measures of integration are essential for assessment of the development, design and implementation of integration within healthcare systems. This review aimed to identify measurement instruments for integration within children and young people's (CYP) healthcare systems (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021235383). Methods: We searched electronic databases (PubMED and Ovid Embase) using three main concepts: '(integrated care) AND (child population) AND (measurement)', along with additional searches. Results: Fifteen studies describing 16 measurement instruments were eligible for inclusion. The majority of studies were conducted in the USA. There was a diversity of health conditions included in the studies. The most frequent type of assessment used was a questionnaire (11 identified), but interviews, patient data and healthcare records, and focus groups were also used. Integration outcomes assessed were quality of care coordination, quality of collaboration, continuity of care, completeness of care, structure of care, quality of communication, and local implementation of integrated care. Conclusion: A variety of instruments for the measurement of integration within CYP healthcare systems were identified. Further work on the standardisation of integrated care measures would be valuable; however, it is important that instruments and measures meet the needs of specific settings, populations and conditions being studied.

Indexed as

children and young peoplehealth careintegrated caremeasurementrapid review

Identifiers

PMID37250761
PMCPMC10215994

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.