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.
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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maintaining continuity in fragmented healthcare systems.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2026Article
- Continuity of care in UK primary care: a scoping review of measures, challenges, and future interventions.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- English general practice in a period of change: a mixed-methods study of staff and patient perspectives.BJGP open · 2026Article
- The decision-making processes of UK general practice nurse prescribers when managing acute illness in patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a qualitative study using think aloud and staged vignettes.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- Integrated care management model for liver transplantation: a narrative review and single-center implementation experience.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Can multidisciplinary teams improve the quality of primary care? A scoping review.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
- Team climate, job satisfaction, burnout and practice performance: results of a national survey of staff in general practices in England.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Quantifying, Understanding and Enhancing Relational Continuity of Care (QUERCC): a mixed-methods protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Improving primary healthcare quality in China through training needs analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- The effect of general practice team composition and climate on staff and patient experiences: a systematic review.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Is Adopting a Microteams Model a Solution to Delivering Continuity of Care in Modern Primary Care?Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.