SynthesisAnnals of family medicine2025
Mapping Evidence and Constructing an Analytic Framework: An Umbrella Review Summarizing Primary Care Family Physicians' Experiences With Clinical Integration.
Synthesis in Annals of family medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStrengthening primary care's integration function is a systematic approach to promote integrated care. Understanding the factors influencing the process of integrating care for every patient is crucial for effective intervention planning. The objective of this study was to generate an analytic framework and evidence map of the barriers and facilitators perceived by family physicians (FPs) in clinical integration, a process to coordinate health care services across time, place, discipline, diseases, and patient demographics.
methodsUsing the Joanna Briggs Institute umbrella review methodology, we searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases, identifying 90 reviews (2010-2022) on primary care FPs and clinical integration. We adopted a best-fit framework approach to group the factors into a customized clinical integration framework, reflecting how a health care system functions. Two evidence maps were created to visualize the reviews' distribution. We validated the framework with another 21 reviews (2022-2024).
resultsThe analytic framework consisted of 9 themes and 21 subthemes based on 2,891 factors derived from external and internal sources within primary care practices. Several subthemes were common across themes related to individuals (FPs, physicians other than family physicians and allied health providers, patients) and operating units (systems, organizations, practices), highlighting shared elements. The professional theme was the most significant, appearing in 86% of the reviews and including subthemes related to diseases, clinical guidelines, and teamwork. In contrast, themes related to systems, organizations, and practices were reported less frequently (48%, 22%, and 23%).
conclusionThe complex interactions among factors, subthemes, and themes elucidate challenges in finding a universal strategy or implementing initiatives. The generated evidence maps indicated knowledge gaps to guide future research work.
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.