Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37549994›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2023

Primary care micro-teams: an international systematic review of patient and healthcare professional perspectives.

Charles Coombs, Tanya Cohen, Claire Duddy, Kamal R Mahtani, Emily Owen, Nia Roberts, Aman Saini, Alexander Staddon Foster, Sophie Park

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Maintaining continuity in fragmented healthcare systems.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Charles CoombsUniversity College London, London.ORCID 0000-0002-2023-6462
Tanya CohenUniversity College London, London.
Claire DuddyUniversity of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-7083-6589
Kamal R MahtaniUniversity of Oxford, Oxford.ORCID 0000-0002-7791-8552
Emily OwenUniversity College London, London.ORCID 0000-0001-5558-8567
Nia RobertsUniversity of Oxford, Oxford.
Aman SainiUniversity College London, London.
Alexander Staddon FosterUniversity College London, London.
Sophie ParkUniversity College London, London.ORCID 0000-0002-1521-2052

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternational trends have shifted to creating large general practices. There is an assumption that interdisciplinary teams will increase patient accessibility and provide more cost-effective, efficient services. Micro-teams have been proposed to mitigate for some potential challenges of practice expansion, including continuity of care.

aimTo review available literature and examine how micro-teams are described, and identify opportunities and limitations for patients and practice staff. DESIGN AND

settingThis was an international systematic review of studies published in English.

methodDatabases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) and grey literature were searched. Studies were included if they provided evidence about implementation of primary care micro-teams. Framework analysis was used to synthesise identified literature. The research team included a public contributor co-applicant. The authors conducted stakeholder discussions with those with and without experience of micro-team implementation.

resultsOf the 462 studies identified, 24 documents met the inclusion criteria. Most included empirical data from healthcare professionals, describing micro-team implementation. Results included characteristics of the literature; micro-team description; range of ways micro-teams have been implemented; reported outcomes; and experiences of patients and staff.

conclusionThe organisation of primary care has potential impact on the nature and quality of patient care, safety, and outcomes. This review contributes to current debate about care delivery and how this can impact on the experiences and outcomes of patients and staff. This analysis identifies several key opportunities and challenges for future research, policy, and practice.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansPrimary Health Carecontinuity of carefamily practicegeneral practicehumansmultidisciplinaryteam

Identifiers

PMID37549994
PMCPMC10428005

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.