ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
Effectiveness and Stakeholder Views of Community-Based Allied Health on Acute Care Utilization: A Mixed Methods Review.
Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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.
- Effectiveness of Positive Psychology Interventions for Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The Economic Impact of Community-Based Allied Health on the Acute Sector: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this mixed methods systematic review was to synthesize contemporary evidence on effectiveness of community-based allied health (AH) services on acute care utilizations and views from relevant stakeholders. An a priori protocol was registered with PROSPERO [CRD42023437013]. Inclusion criteria were: (a) stand-alone interventions led by practitioners/graduates from one or more target AH professions (audiology, exercise physiology, diabetes educator, nutrition and dietetics, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, podiatry, psychology, social work, and speech pathology); (b) examined acute care utilization-related outcomes with/without perceptions of relevant stakeholders; and (c) published after 2010 and in English. Eligible studies were identified from: (a) bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, EmCare, PsycINFO, CINAHL complete, and the Cochrane Library) (September 19, 2023); (b) online databases (ProQuest Central and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global) and theses repository (Trove) (September 20, 2023); (c) Google and Google Scholar (October 17-18, 2023); and (d) citation searching. A modified version of McMaster Critical Appraisal Tools and McGill Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool were used to assess methodological quality. Data synthesis was through convergent segregated approach. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. There were 67 included papers. The integrated quantitative and qualitative findings demonstrated mixed evidence, likely influenced by the heterogeneity of the evidence base, for the effectiveness of AH services on acute care utilizations. Patients and their carers were largely positive about these services, highlighting opportunities to build on these experiences. The certainty of evidence for patient-important outcomes was however "very low", emphasizing cautious interpretation. The findings of this review shed light on the breadth and scope of AH in the community sector, and its potential impact on the acute sector. Further investment in, and ongoing research on, community-based AH can strengthen primary healthcare and relieve pressure on the acute sector.
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.