ArticleBMC primary care2024
Piloting a community health and well-being worker model in Cornwall: a guide for implementation and spread.
Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of Community Health Worker programmes in high-income countries: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Transforming dementia care pathway: why shifting to a universal, comprehensive, proactive, local, and integrated model is imperative to improve outcomes.Frontiers in dementia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis paper evaluates the introduction of ten Community Health and Well-being Workers (CHWW) in four pilot sites across Cornwall. The period evaluated was from the initial start in June 2022 until June 2023, covering the project setup and implementation across a range of Primary Care Networks (PCNs) and Voluntary sector partners (VSCO).
methodsAll ten CHWWs and their managers at each site were interviewed (n = 16) to understand the barriers and enablers to implementation and wider learning that could be captured around the project setup. Qualitative methods were used for data collection, including semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Transcripts were thematically analysed for cross-cutting themes, as well as site-specific effects.
resultsIn terms of learning, we cover the following key areas, which were of most importance to the successful implementation of the pilot: The CHWWs were introduced into an already established, successful social prescribing (SP) system by the time the CHWW project began. CHWWs can access some of the same training and office space as SPs, with overlapping meeting schedules allowing them joint input on some topics. It seemed that all the pre-work in terms of relationships and learning about a similar role helped a rapid implementation. Each site's CHWW management structure uses the same line management as the SPs. Roles were clustered together to remove duplication, maximise coverage and triaging of residents. The largest barrier to overcome was integrating VSCO staff into NHS systems. Conversely, hosting CHWWs within an NHS organisation has pros and cons, namely better access to NHS data and staff, but longer lead-in time for registration on systems, and more bureaucracy for procurement/spend.
conclusionsLooking to the future, the pilot's success has spread the programme to other integrated care areas in the country, with ongoing plans for further rollout and evaluation in the coming years.
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.