Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38438196›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2024

Delivering relational continuity of care in UK general practice: a scoping review.

Miglena N Fox, Jon M Dickson, Patrick Burch, Daniel Hind, Olivia Hawksworth

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2024. 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. Continuity of Care as Diagnostic Infrastructure.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. What do patients and clinicians think about continuity in general practice in England? a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Delivering relational continuity of care in light of recent GP contract changes.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Miglena N FoxCentre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Jon M DicksonSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK j.m.dickson@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1361-2714
Patrick BurchCentre for Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5439-8454
Daniel HindSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6409-4793
Olivia HawksworthSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6513-100X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRelational continuity of care (patients seeing the same GP) is associated with better outcomes for patients, but it has been declining in general practice in the UK.

aimTo understand what interventions have been tried to improve relational continuity of care in general practice in the UK. DESIGN &

settingScoping review of articles on UK General Practice and written in English.

methodAn electronic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from 2002 to the present day was undertaken. Sources of grey literature were also searched. Studies that detailed service-level methods of achieving relational continuity of care with a GP in the UK were eligible for inclusion. Interventions were described narratively in relation to the elements listed in the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). A logic model describing the rationale behind interventions was constructed.

resultsSeventeen unique interventions were identified. The interventions used a wide variety of strategies to try to improve relational continuity. This included personal lists, amended booking processes, regular reviews, digital technology, facilitated follow-ups, altered appointment times, and use of acute hubs. Twelve of the interventions targeted specific patient groups for increased continuity while others focused on increasing continuity for all patients. Changes in continuity levels were measured inconsistently using several different methods.

conclusionSeveral different strategies have been used in UK general practices in an attempt to improve relational continuity of care. While there is a similar underlying logic to these interventions, their scope, aims, and methods vary considerably. Furthermore, owing to a weak evidence base, comparing their efficacy remains challenging.

Indexed as

continuity of patient caregeneral practiceprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID38438196
PMCPMC11300996

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.