Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40727871›Full record

ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2025

Understanding Rural Patients' Perspectives on Patient Care Teams.

Amy Tite, Brynn Magner, Emily Pierce, Mindy Ann Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Amy TiteThompson Rivers University, Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada.
Brynn MagnerUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Emily PierceUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Mindy Ann SmithMichigan State University, Department of Family Medicine | Kootenay-Boundary Patient Advisory Committee and Community (British Columbia, Canada).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: With a critical primary care clinician shortage, team-based care (TBC) is under development to enhance access, especially in rural regions. However, there has been limited discussion about TBC from the patient's perspective. We explored rural patient preferences for composition of their current and ideal primary health care team. Methods: An anonymous online survey of rural residents was conducted within the Kootenay-Boundary region of British Columbia. The survey included demographic information and current and ideal health care team composition. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: Four hundred ninety individuals responded to the survey. Most respondents self-identified as female, were over age 40 years, White, and had a postsecondary school diploma. Those with a health care provider (n=362, 74%) included a primary care doctor (86.5%), alternative medicine practitioner (52.2%), allied health professional (35.4%), friends/family/support people (35.1%), specialist physician (30.1%) and nurse practitioner (18.5%) on their team. Ideal health care teams included a primary care physician (92.2%) followed by an alternative medicine practitioner (64.1%), allied health professionals (61.2%), specialist physician (59.8%), and nurse practitioner (54.8%). Almost half of all respondents (46.6%) chose five or more categories of team members and 43.7% chose 3-4 categories of members. Respondents (81.1%) were highly likely (49.6%) or likely (31.6%) to affiliate with a primary health care team clinic. Conclusion: Both current and ideal health care team membership included many types of caregivers, with most respondents including three or more team-member categories. As many people in rural BC are without primary care providers, incorporating alternative medical practitioners and allied health professions into clinical teams within multidisciplinary settings could improve health care access.

Identifiers

PMID40727871
PMCPMC12303149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.