Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37858052›Full record

Trial reportBMC primary care2023

Implementing and evaluating care and support planning: a qualitative study of health professionals' experiences in public polyclinics in Singapore.

Vikki A Entwistle, Sharon McCann, Victor Weng Keong Loh, E Shyong Tai, Wee Hian Tan, Tong Wei Yew

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Staying Connected? Revaluing 'Relationship Goods' in Digital Health Ecologies.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Vikki A EntwistleHealth Services Research Unit, Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, Scotland, UK. Vikki.entwistle@abdn.ac.uk.
Sharon McCannHealth Services Research Unit, Health Sciences Building, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, Scotland, UK.
Victor Weng Keong LohDivision of Family Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
E Shyong TaiDepartment of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Wee Hian TanNational University Polyclinics, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.
Tong Wei YewDepartment of Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU2Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 209811/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust RG13795-18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwo polyclinics in Singapore modified systems and trained health professionals to provide person-centred Care and Support Planning (CSP) for people with diabetes within a clinical trial. We aimed to investigate health professionals' perspectives on CSP to inform future developments.

methodsQualitative research including 23 semi-structured interviews with 13 health professionals and 3 co-ordinators. Interpretive analysis, including considerations of how different understandings, enactments, experiences and evaluative judgements of CSP clustered across health professionals, and potential causal links between them.

resultsBoth polyclinic teams introduced CSP and sustained it through COVID-19 disruptions. The first examples health professionals gave of CSP 'going well' all involved patients who came prepared, motivated and able to modify behaviours to improve their biomedical markers, but health professionals also said that they only occasionally saw such patients in practice. Health professionals' accounts of how they conducted CSP conversations varied: some interpretations and reported enactments were less clearly aligned with the developers' person-centred aspirations than others. Health professionals brought different communication skill repertoires to their encounters and responded variably to challenges to CSP that arose from: the linguistic and educational diversity of patients in this polyclinic context; the cultural shift that CSP involved; workload pressures; organisational factors that limited relational and informational continuity of care; and policies promoting biomedical measures as key indicators of healthcare quality. While all participants saw potential in CSP, they differed in the extent to which they recognised relational and experiential benefits of CSP (beyond biomedical benefits), and their recommendations for continuing its use beyond the clinical trial were contingent on several considerations. Our analysis shows how narrower and broader interpretive emphases and initial skill repertoires can interact with situational challenges and respectively constrain or extend health professionals' ability to refine their skills with experiential learning, reduce or enhance the potential benefits of CSP, and erode or strengthen motivation to use CSP.

conclusionHealth professionals' interpretations of CSP, along with their communication skills, interact in complex ways with other features of healthcare systems and diverse patient-circumstance scenarios. They warrant careful attention in efforts to implement and evaluate person-centred support for people with long-term conditions.

Indexed as

COVID-19Delivery of Health CareHumansQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareSingaporeCare and support planningContinuity of careDiabetesHealthcare improvementPerson-centred careProfessional educationProfessional-patient relationsQualitative interviewsSelf-management support

Identifiers

PMID37858052
PMCPMC10585850

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.