ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026
Identifying Implementation Needs and Developing Strategies to Optimize Integration of Patient Priorities Care in Primary Care: A Qualitative Formative Evaluation of Two Study Sites.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundPatient priorities care (PPC) was developed to focus care on outcomes most important to multimorbid older adults, rather than single-disease clinical practice guidelines. In PPC, a care team member conducts a health priorities identification (HPI) conversation with a patient, and the resulting HPI note is shared with the patient's provider to guide priorities-aligned care. Primary care clinics and patients may benefit from PPC, but successful implementation relies on assessing features of the sites and end users to inform implementation strategies.
objectiveConduct a formative evaluation of two sites using in-depth qualitative interviews. Identify implementation needs and develop strategies to optimize the integration of PPC.
designFormative evaluation was guided by the i-PARIHS implementation framework.
participants28 primary care clinicians sampled from two VA healthcare systems completed telephone interviews. APPROACH: Semi-structured interviews elicited implementation needs related to an upcoming PPC implementation trial. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded using a mixed inductive and deductive approach, and thematically analyzed. Analysis informed strategies to facilitate the implementation of PPC. KEY
resultsThematic analysis revealed two themes and related subthemes: (1) Enhance potential usability of the patient health priorities identification (HPI) note and PPC process, with focus on the timing of the HPI call, the content and placement of the resulting HPI note, and modification of materials to address the time burden associated with providing and documenting priorities-aligned care; and (2) Address contextual issues related to clinician participation, including garnering leadership support, allaying concerns about performance metrics, and modifying clinician training to optimize integration into existing workflows. Within each theme, we present strategies devised to address implementation needs.
conclusionThe formative evaluation identified implementation needs, which informed the development of strategies ranging from specific modifications to multicomponent strategies to facilitate the implementation of PPC into routine primary care. Future research will evaluate the adoption of these strategies.
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.