Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39098902›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Transformation of primary care settings implementing a co-located team-based care model: a scoping review.

Yasmine Frikha, Andrew R Freeman, Nancy Côté, Claudèle Charette, Maxime Desfossés

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Uncovering Four Types of Care Coordination in Primary Care.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025
    Observational
  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.

Yasmine FrikhaFaculty of Graduate and Post-Doctoral Studies, Université Laval , Québec, Canada.
Andrew R FreemanVITAM: Centre de Recherche en Santé Durable, Québec, Québec, Canada. Andrew.Freeman@rea.ulaval.ca.
Nancy CôtéVITAM: Centre de Recherche en Santé Durable, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Claudèle CharetteVITAM: Centre de Recherche en Santé Durable, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Maxime DesfossésVITAM: Centre de Recherche en Santé Durable, Québec, Québec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Canada, primary care reforms led to the implementation of various team-based care models to improve access and provide more comprehensive care for patients. Despite these advances, ongoing challenges remain. The aim of this scoping review is to explore current understanding of the functioning of these care models as well as the contexts in which they have emerged and their impact on the population, providers and healthcare costs.

methodsThe Medline and CINAHL databases were consulted. To be included, team-based care models had to be co-located, involve a family physician, specify the other professionals included, and provide information about their organization, their relevance and their impact within a primary care context. Models based on inter-professional intervention programs were excluded. The organization and coordination of services, the emerging contexts and the impact on the population, providers and healthcare costs were analysed.

resultsA total of 5952 studies were screened after removing duplicates; 15 articles were selected for final analysis. There was considerable variation in the information available as well as the terms used to describe the models. They are operationalized in various ways, generally consistent with the Patient's Medical Home vision. Except for nurses, the inclusion of other types of professionals is variable and tends to be associated with the specific nature of the services offered. The models primarily focus on individuals with mental health conditions and chronic diseases. They appear to generally satisfy the expectations of the overarching framework of a high-performing team-based primary care model at patient and provider levels. However, economic factors are seldom integrated in their evaluations.

conclusionsThe studies rarely provide an overarching view that permits an understanding of the specific contexts, service organization, their impacts, and the broader context of implementation, making it difficult to establish universal guidelines for the operationalization of effective models. Negotiating the inherent complexity associated with implementing models requires a collaborative approach between various stakeholders, including patients, to tailor the models to the specific needs and characteristics of populations in given areas, and reflection about the professionals to be included in delivering these services.

Indexed as

Models, OrganizationalPatient Care TeamPrimary Health CareCanadaHumansFamily physicianInterprofessionalOrganizationPrimary careRole optimizationScoping reviewTeam-based care model

Identifiers

PMID39098902
PMCPMC11299417

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.