Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40735796›Full record

ArticleInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing

Multistakeholder Perceptions of Priorities in Primary Care as a Source of Local Innovation: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

Gerri Lamb, Jane Hook, Richard Kratche, Kristen K Will, David Coon, Nina Karamehmedovic

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gerri LambArizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9583-8783
Jane HookArizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Richard KratcheCommonSpirit, Phoenix, AZ, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-1600-2483
Kristen K WillArizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
David CoonArizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Nina KaramehmedovicArizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to compare the needs and priorities of multiple stakeholder groups as a source of local innovation to improve primary care. Focus groups were conducted with 44 members of 7 primary care stakeholder groups associated with a large health system and its academic and community networks. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis. Initial categories for the content analysis were drawn from the Clinical Learning Environment Review (CLER 2.0) framework. Three CLER 2.0 concepts, quality health care, teaming, and wellbeing were central to an optimal primary care experience for all groups. Quality health care was the top priority across groups. Shared themes included having meaningful relationships and achieving healthy outcomes. While all groups perceived teaming and wellbeing as important, each stakeholder group had different priorities. Willingness to engage in teaming was conditional on its ability to meet both shared and unique needs. Our findings suggest that shared priorities among primary care stakeholder groups provide a robust foundation for local innovation. Understanding differences in priorities is necessary to identify conditions of engagement across groups. Creative integration of common and unique priorities is key to sustainable local innovation.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesOrganizational InnovationPrimary Health CareStakeholder ParticipationFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleQualitative ResearchQuality of Health Careclinical learning environmenthealth care qualityinnovationprimary careteamwork

Identifiers

PMID40735796
PMCPMC12317177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.